It works as expected.Įven for around £700, I’m not getting the poly synth that I want or is advertised. Mono mode works like a four oscillator synth, switch on whichever oscillators you want to hear, tune to whatever intervals you like and play single notes. To work around this, the Poly-D has three playing modes Mono, Uni(son) and Poly. So what’s the difference then? The short answer is, para is more limited and doesn’t sound the same as poly, otherwise we wouldn’t need the different terms to describe them obvs. It begs the question: did someone at Behringer say “honestly…guys…we should call this the ‘para-d'” and everyone in the room laughed at them and replied “but that’s exactly what we are doing! We’re producing a parody of the real thing”. In contrast, a paraphonic has four oscillators, but only one filter and one amp, etc. A true four-voice poly has four of everything, four filters, four amps, four modulation envelopes etc. To clarify the difference for those who haven’t come across a paraphonic synth before (and to be fair, there aren’t many paraphonic synths out there to come across), it’s all in the way it sounds when the notes overlap. Because after all, if you fall for the marketing trick, you wouldn’t want to be disappointed when it arrived and it didn’t work the way you expected it to now, would you? So let’s be clear, there’s a big difference in what you can do with a polyphonic vs a paraphonic synth. Even a paraphonic for $700 is great value. I know, I know, some people will say I’m knit-picking. But that hasn’t stopped them calling it the “Poly-D’ in a vain attempt to distract you from the fact that it is actually a 4 voice ‘paraphonic’ synth.
How could Behringer make a 4 voice polyphonic analog synth based on the Moog Model D for under £700? Well, spoiler alert, they can’t. Here’s a question for you: when is a polyphonic synth not a polyphonic synth? Answer: when it’s a Behringer Poly-D.ĭeep down inside, we all knew it was too good to be true.
0 kommentar(er)
