Jupiter 80 256 polyphony and 10 Tones meaning???

[GuitarTabs4synth]

Could someone correct me if I'm wrong about this.

Correction: 256 polyphony is like the Jupiter 80's ability to play 256 distinct notes at any given instant.

And the Jupiter 80's 10 simultaneous Tones capability means there are 10 sound generators working in parallel at any given key press.

Thanks in advance.

[Watermelon]

Polyphony relates to oscillators, the smallest sound synthesis unit. The JP-80 can play 256 oscillators simultaneously.

A tone often make use of multiple oscillators. For example, a SuperNatural Synth Tone stacks up to 3 analog-like oscillators.

A so-called Registration stacks 2 livesests (Upper/Lower) and 2 tones (Rhythm/Solo). As each Liveset is able to stack up to 4 Tones, this makes a grand total of 2*4+2=10 tones simultaeously playable in a Registration. With 3 oscillators per tone, a single key will then require 3*10=30 osc to play. In such a case, useable polyphony becomes 256/30= approx. 8 voices. This is a worst-case scenario, as most factory presets never use a 10-Tone layering with 3 oscillators each. Feel reassured.

[ozy]

Polyphony relates to oscillators, the smallest sound synthesis unit. The JP-80 can play 256 oscillators simultaneously.

This a totaklly new approach to terminology.

The prophet5 was advertised as having 5 voices of polyphony, not 10.

AND the oscillators could be detuned, so indeed you could hear 10 different tones by detuninc osc2 by a 5th and playing [ouch!] a 5-notes chord.

NOBODY, NOBODY dreamed of calling the prophet a 10-voices polyphonic synth though.

And again:

prophet08 is considered a 8-voice synth, and it has 16 oscillators.

the minimoog is monophonic, has 3 oscillators

in the digital domain, the VL-1 is considered monophonic, albeit it has two elements which can play two independent notes on some presets ( but can't play two notes on the same sound, so it's legitimately called monophonic)

etc etc etc

The conceptual framework is: in any musical context since the X century, "polyphony" means "many NOTES".

So, may I, or may I not, play 256 notes? 128? 8? 5?

Any different corporate lingo is legitimate, but it should avoid borrowing terms from the history of music and twisting them.

In my humble opinion, a synth is 10 notes polyphonic if 10 fingers can play 10 different lines, at varying intervals.

Stacking, fixed detuning, layering, don't count as polyphony in any musical sense.

[Watermelon]

This a totaklly new approach to terminology.
The prophet5 was advertised as having 5 voices of polyphony, not 10.

The Prophet-5 also offered a unison-mode. This mode turned the synth into monophonic. Does it mean that the Prophet-5 was a 1-voice "polyphonic" synth? No, it's five. Why? Because, in the best case-scenario, the Prophet-5 is able to output 5 notes simultaneously (not 10).

Best-case scenario for the Jupiter-80 is a 1-osc Tone, with a polyphony of 256 notes, in the true sense of what polyphony means.

[Chrisk-K]

Watermelon wrote:Polyphony relates to oscillators, the smallest sound synthesis unit. The JP-80 can play 256 oscillators simultaneously.

ozy wrote
This a totaklly new approach to terminology.
The prophet5 was advertised as having 5 voices of polyphony, not 10.
AND the oscillators could be detuned, so indeed you could hear 10 different tones by detuninc osc2 by a 5th and playing [ouch!] a 5-notes chord.
NOBODY, NOBODY dreamed of calling the prophet a 10-voices polyphonic synth though.

Ozy, have you been in a cave over the past 25 years? Since the mid 80's, the number of polyphony has meant the number of oscillators for virtually every digital synth.

[GuitarTabs4synth]

Thanks for correcting me.

I don't ever recall anywhere they defined polyphony.

So 76 keys on the Jupiter 80 and 10 tones means with 256 polyphony either you can hear 25 simultaneous key presses or 26 simultaneous key presses.

Which is it?

[ozy]

Ozy, have you been in a cave over the past 25 years? Since the mid 80's, the number of polyphony has meant the number of oscillators for virtually every digital synth.

yes, I was in a cave. I was busy studying logic,

which is something that is sorely missing in your posts.

As is the case of the musical genius who can't tell the difference between polyphony and unison.

A choir of 120 people, all of the singing "laaaa" on A4, is not polyphony: it is unison.

And again:

Prophet5 in unison mode is a monophonic PATCH in a usually polyphonic MACHINE. In that moment, the machine becomes monophonic. But being able of playing 5 notes it is correctly considered polyphonic. 5-, not 10- voices polyphonic.

(I can't care less what "Corporate Lingo since the 80s" says polyphony is. I know music, and music says polyphony is about notes, not about elements of timbre. Or, if you play one note on a organ with three stops pulled, that's three notes? Polyphony in keyboard instruments pre-dates synthesizers by a some centuries, Sir. 20 years of Roland-Yammi_Korg propaganda won't change that).

So, the only logically coherent answer above was:

"jupiter80 can play 256 notes on patches which are built with a single oscillator".

That is an honest answer.

I.e., it goes to 256 on patches which sound more or less like a early-90s Korg rompler,

because at least 2 or (better) 4 velocity-crossfaded layers are requested for a decent acoustic emulation.

So, the jupiter is 128-voices polyphonic when working on the standards of any two-oscillators mid-90s synth,

64 voices polyphonic when samples are split on 4 levels.

And it is 85 notes polyphonic when working on a GAIA-standard.

It is fair.

No more than fair.

Tha could explain the note cutoffs I had noticed in orchestral chords when I tested the jupiter.

[mojkarma]

ozy,
IMHO you're stretching this discussion a little bit to much into an unnecessary area.
When we discuss about the polyphony - or should I say "polyphony" - in keyboards, we don't discuss about musical things but about technical aspects. Those are important for us because of the nature how digital electronic instruments work.
All manufacturers talk about polyphony from a technical aspect, informing us about how many notes/voices we can achieve on the most basic level, that is the oscillator. That is how the manufacturer state the "polyphony" since the early nineties, if not even earlier.
So, your statement about "new approach to terminology" is not correct. There is no copyright on the word "polyphony" and there is nothing wrong if manufacturers use that word to explain a technical aspect instead of the historically pure musical aspect.
At the end, we want to know how many notes can be played under a certain circumstance on a keyboard and not whether 120 people singing one note counts as 120 polyphony or unison.

[ozy]

At the end, we want to know how many notes can be played under a certain circumstance on a keyboard

I'll follow you.

But then,

Either we talk in absolute terms

or we relativize terms, and correlate them with the current status of technology.

In the former case, 256 notes on a single oscillator IS polyphony, but let's stop using adjectives like "huge", "stack", "massive", because in signle-oscillator mode the jupiter is anything but huge.

In the latter case, considering 4 layers (2oscillators with 2-layered samples) as the MINIMAL current industrial standard,

256 is anything but exceptional.

It means "64 notes of a decent patch", "32 notes on a fat layer", and 16 notes if you stack a trumpet, a sax, a horn and a clarinet.

there is not monopoly on a word, say "polyphony"

this is a long, philosophical discussion, which has been going on for a while.

And which was exasperated by the advertising industry, which sells "enzymatic" dish-machine soap, or "perfect white" toothpaste... or "full polyphony" keyboards.

Consumerism has been so introjected by users, that advertising headlines are considered on par with technical information: pure nonsense as "cheap money", "free credit", "digital analogue" or "natural (preternatural, supernatural) technology" has become commonplace,

and people get upset when you remind them the real meaning of words.

I beg to disagree on the subject.

I think that words have a meaning related to things. And they have history. In music, polyphony is polyphony, no matter what anybody says. Voice is voice, notes are notes, and oscillators are oscillators. and 256/4 still amounts to 64.

Others, on the contarry, think that common usage and conventions (especially NAMM Salesamen Conventions...) change the deep meaning of words (and of things). I think they don't.

But let's agree to disagree, and let's move on.

[cello]

From my dictionary:

"(on an electronic keyboard or synthesizer) the number of notes or voices that can be played simultaneously without loss"

[mojkarma]

At the end, we want to know how many notes can be played under a certain circumstance on a keyboard

I'll follow you.

But then,

Either we talk in absolute terms

or we relativize terms, and correlate them with the current status of technology.

In the former case, 256 notes on a single oscillator IS polyphony, but let's stop using adjectives like "huge", "stack", "massive", because in signle-oscillator mode the jupiter is anything but huge.

In the latter case, considering 4 layers (2oscillators with 2-layered samples) as the MINIMAL current industrial standard,

256 is anything but exceptional.

It means "64 notes of a decent patch", "32 notes on a fat layer", and 16 notes if you stack a trumpet, a sax, a horn and a clarinet.

See, I could agree with you that 256 is not exceptional, huge or massive. But we also have to look what we currently have on the market. And here we're back to linguistics and semantics! :)
You can't define what huge, exceptional or massive is, if you don't have a comparison. And in comparison with most other similar keyboards on the market, 256 is often twice as much compared to some other keyboards. And yes, I consider even having 64 voices of polyphony as massive, where the number comes from two oscillators, crossfaded thru 4 layers. It is massive, because on a 128 polyphony keyboard you only have 32 voices. And respectively on older models even less. Playing that sound with 64 voices of polyphony or just 32 can make a "huge" difference.

there is not monopoly on a word, say "polyphony"

this is a long, philosophical discussion, which has been going on for a while.

And which was exasperated by the advertising industry, which sells "enzymatic" dish-machine soap, or "perfect white" toothpaste... or "full polyphony" keyboards.

Consumerism has been so introjected by users, that advertising headlines are considered on par with technical information: pure nonsense as "cheap money", "free credit", "digital analogue" or "natural (preternatural, supernatural) technology" has become commonplace,

and people get upset when you remind them the real meaning of words.

That's all fine, but let's try to think about alternatives for a moment. What would you suggest? What should the manufacturer state? Should they say that the polyphony is 64 if you do this or that, 32 if you add some more layers and even 8 if you use up all layers? They simply state the max. polyphony available with the most basic block, the oscillator. And for me, that's enough. Because I can do the math for some more complex situations by myself.
Advertising? That's for kids. The JP80 is not supernatural at all and equally the Kronos doesn't change it at all. Nor does the inspiration on the Motif XF comes in a flash...

[Bruce Lychee]

[
It means "64 notes of a decent patch", "32 notes on a fat layer", and 16 notes if you stack a trumpet, a sax, a horn and a clarinet.

You can stack 10 acoustic SN tones and play a 10 note chord and you won't get any note stealing. I suppose some people want to make mush, but I'm not sure where practical limitations would ever come into play. I'm the few Reg items where note stealing was found under testing, the only way to get that note stealing was to use the Reg item in the most unmusical of ways.

I'm not sure how the polyphony of the Jupiter is really distributed, but I know I have never come across any polyphony limitation working with the Jupiter.

[ozy]

From my dictionary:

"(on an electronic keyboard or synthesizer) the number of notes or voices that can be played simultaneously without loss"

amen.

[ozy]

From my dictionary:

"(on an electronic keyboard or synthesizer) the number of notes or voices that can be played simultaneously without loss"

amen.

I suppose some people want to make mush [...], but I'm not sure where practical limitations would ever come into play. I'm the few Reg items where note stealing was found under testing, the only way to get that note stealing was to use the Reg item in the most unmusical of ways.

I held a 4-notes on a orchestral patch, tried playing a solo note on top, and got stolen the chord.

That's enough for me.

I entered the discussion just because there was some misuse of musical terms, but I see that everything hits the fanboy wall.

Bye

[emenelton]

Ozy

The key-bed is automatically divided into zones with fixed polyphony allocations. Is it possible that you were playing in only a single Zone?