Plus you don't have to sell both your kidneys, your arm, your leg AND your firstborn to afford it. And for the price that thing is built solid and sturdy. It's also heavy as heck and no plastic bomber like a Roland GAIA for example. My ONLY complaint is they should have added a multi-effect from Klark & Technik like they did in the Odyssey Clone.
Ah! I get you. Yes, this can be disappointing if you expect something else. I see my Poly D more as a mono synth with 4 OSCs, which makes it even more powerful than a Mini Moog. And as the icing on the cake, I can also play chords when I tune the OSCs correctly. Btw., it can create very lush and warm Juno type chords with the on-board Chorus. The main limitation that bothers me in this respect are the 4 "voices" which is often not enough for augmented chords. So you have to carefully pick the voicing: root, third, seven and then the augmented degree.
Hey - Thanks for checking this out. I was more disappointed by the fact that none of the reviews showed, in the way I have, how paraphony works on the Poly D than the fact that it is paraphonic. It is what it is (although Behringer does actually call it polyphonic) and it's great that so many people like it. I think if it had been mono I might have kept it - which may seem odd as you can, of course, simply use it in mono mode - but it was sort of like buying a car with 5 gears but only able to use 3 😀
@@IanWaugh -- absolutely. I got a different paraphonic synth (the MonoPoly) and found the same issue; I similarly accepted it as just part of the design. But today I watched two different vid on the Poly D, and both featured demonstrations which included playing chords faultlessly -- just like a poly -- so your vid seems to be desperately needed as antidote to the glossy, problem-free chords seen in other vids.
@@Jobotubular That's all I was trying to do so thank you very much. It's such a basic and essential aspect of the instrument, it's surprising that other reviews don't mention it... 😲
@@IanWaugh I think I'm buying the Model D (no keyboard now, apparently they used to offer it in keyboard version) and also the Pro 800; returning my Prophet 10 module.
i've probably spent over an hour watching videos and reading about paraphonic synths in the last few months and honestly i never understood it well until i saw this video. thank you very much! i liked and subscribed :)
I think the Paraphonic nature of this synth, sets it apart. It’s a reason to buy it, rather than yet another Mini-Moog reproduction. I applaud the difference!
I feel like Behringer started out aiming to build a keyboard version of their Model D module, and later decided to add paraphony as an extra feature to set it apart from all the other monos and Moog clones on the market. Consequently buyers more interested in it as a monosynth were likely more satisfied than those primarily expecting to use it like a polyphonic synth. Arguably it should have been called "Para-D".
I think when they were working on their MonoPoly clone, they decided to make the Poly D work the same way because the paraphony works just like MonoPoly and it's the same size/format. Poly D is basically the MonoPoly if it were made by Moog instead of Korg.
Thank you for the demonstration and for explaining this so clearly! I'm considering buying a Poly D, but haven't previously owned a paraphonic synth, so this was very useful :)
I've owned a poly D since October 2020.. it is an awesome synth but i find myself really only using it for its mono function. It's really not practical for recording chords when making songs. For $800 I knew something had to be lacking. Glad to see a video clearly talking about the poly function and the problems that occurs with it. I'm saving up to get a Juno 60 so i can make sweet, buttery and in tune chords... great video!
Thank you for your kind comments. I was tempted to keep it and use it solely as a mono synth but I think that would be like getting a car and never putting it in top gear 😀 The sounds are otherwise excellent.
Hey, not to be mister butt-in, but, for the money, I think the DeepMind 12 is an amazing poly synth. Almost a year in and it's still fresh every time I start messing around. That's my two pence.
good to know that mono would be the most realistic expectation of poly-d. i do love my model-d so i might just stay put there. wondering if you considered the juno ju-06 boutique and how that fairs for this use?
This was the strong point years ago on the Korg Mono/Poly and creating random weird sequences with different waveforms and settings on each oscillator .
I had watched enough demos and reviews to know this before I bought my Poly D early last year, so I did not go into this expecting it to be a polyphonic Minimoog clone. In fact, I rarely use mine paraphonically. Instead, I use it as an affordable Minimoog Model D -- monophonic, like the original -- but WITH AN EXTRA OSCILLATOR! So for me, it's just a Model D with extra spice that I didn't need to pawn anything else to get, and I'm still quite happy with that purchase. But I think it's great that you've made this video, Ian, to help others who are considering purchasing a Poly D understand what it really is they'll be buying, so thanks for doing it mate!
Thank you, Bob. Yes, as long as you know what it is, that's fine 😊 And you have the right approach. But not everyone does as is evident by many comments. Of cours, the name doesn't help 😄
What you're essentially saying is "I'm disappointed that my Poly-D doesn't work like an Oberheim 4-voice, with 4 completely independent synth chains that behave the same no matter how I play." That's not how it's designed, and it's never going to do that Even a Deepmind 12--while far better suited as a true polysynth--doesn't really have that kind of capability. You should just buy a Cherry Audio 8-Voice VST, and it will do exactly what you want. The rest of us are happy to get a 4-oscillator true analog MiniMoog clone with a sequencer, arpeggiator and chorus (and some limited poly capability) for a fifth of what an original costs.
😁 What I'm saying is: This is how parophony/polyphony works on the Poly D, demonstrated in a way I have not seen in any other review 😁 Great that you and thousands of other like it 👍
Not the best example the Oberheim 4-voice though. It may have 4 complete voices, making it truly polyphonic, but happens to be the one actual synth with totally independent controls and behavior for each voice. It's basically four SEM modules polychained, therefore it would have exactly the same random voice allocation "problem" (or creative use) as the PolyD or Monopoly while trying to play chords, only much more demanding as you have to tune each complete voice to exactly the same sound, not just the oscillators.The Vermona Perfourmer is another equivalent modern example.
@@MyriadOfHoops I know how a 4-Voice works. I chose it because it's one of the only synths ever that actually has 4 voices which are truly independent of each other, in sound and every other respect. Of course, you're right in that if you set them to four different sounds than playing chords or even melodies will get strange effects. Any standard polysynth like a Jupiter-8 or Prophet will give you multiple but identical voices which are also independent in filter and envelope articulation, but are all basically the same sound. But a 4-Voice or Poly-D lets you select different sounds for each voice, which is what I think he says that he wants here. For example, in a 4-Voice or Poly-D, you can set each voice oscillator to a different octave and waveform--something that nearly any other polysynth can't do, but a 4-Voice can. But, unlike a Poly-D, a 4-Voice will also have proper filter and envelope articulation for each voice, regardless of the sounds. If what he really wants is just something like a Prophet, than that's what he should buy--or a DeepMind 6 if he is on a budget and wants to stay with Behrenger.
@@geoffk777 Sure I'm hip with all the differences, having examples of each kind, but what I understood from the video is the opposite of what you're saying here : Ian was not necessarily disappointed with the lack of distinct voice articulation per se on the Poly D, but specifically about random voice allocation with disparate oscillator tones. He actually hoped voices would sound the same by default across a chord. So even tones being precisely the thing even more tedious to achieve with an Oberheim 4 voice, I was therefore surprised you picked exactly that one as an example of what he would have wanted from the Poly D. I understand now that we interpreted things each the opposite way :) PS : another route than proper polyphonic synths, with actually usable paraphony and even tone would be things like the Korg Delta or Moog Opus 3, kind of glorified organs/string machines, not limited in the number of playable notes, with a single filter/enveloppe LFO added for synthy results
This is the only sonic testing of the difference between polyphonic & paraphonic I have watched forty minute discussions without a clear answer I thought the issue was with the single filter and amp circuit?
Hi Ruby - Yes, that is the issue, because the oscillators share the signal path. I just wanted to show the practical limitations of such a system as, like you, I have not seen it demonstrated before. Glad you found it useful.
Paraphonic synths are a world for themselves, and it is obvious that it can be a little disappointing for someone who expects polyphony. But paraphonics has its own characteristic, which on the other side can't be done with many polyphonic ones. You trigger the envelopes with the first key and holding one of the keys, you can create a soft chord progression without re-triggering envelopes again (like playing a distorted/sustained e-guitar picking a string and then sliding around without picking it again). By the other hand, you can create an arpeggio which changes the oscillator characteristics on each step. Paraphonic top octave synths (mainly strings, organs and harmoniums) offered the possibility to play as many keys as you can simultaneously, what in days of monophonic or 4x- and 6x- polyphonic synths, allowed you to play full two-handed chords to create rich pads on such devices. For another example, the iconic VP-330 needs this (dis-)advantage to create so lovely vocalizations that wouldn't be possible if at each melody note a new envelope would be triggered. I will buy this Synth because of its lack of displays and menus, it's straight analog sound shaping, the simple sequencer and the "extra" paraphonics, without getting lost and losing the spontaneity while diving in the deep parameter oceans of my VA-Synths.
Hi Achim - Yes, all good points. Paras are a separate genre. But I wanted to demonstrate how it worked on a synth which calls itself a 'Poly', Many potential buyers (according to comments) thought it was a real poly.
Yeah I saw LoopOp mentioned this and was one of the reasons I didn’t get it. He doesn’t go really into it and if I remember correctly he just says fairly quickly and nonchalantly that you never know which oscillator you’re gonna get which can be good or bad depending… whatever… something else. I guess if you tune all 4 oscillators to the same range then it doesn’t matter which one you get but that’s not the reason I’d get a Poly D. Hence I didn’t get it
Yes, that's how to get it to play as a Poly but it's not what I want from a synth, either. Lots of folk are happy, though, which is fine. The reason for making the video was exactly as you describe - I haven't seen a review that actually shows how paraphony works on the Poly D 😶 Glad you found it helpful.
@@IanWaugh I agree on pargo, Loopop did that, and some others as well also you could read it. It was almost stated everyhwere it is not a polyphonic but a paraphonic. It was a little goodie before the monopoly was introduced. So being "only paraphonic" this was actually a feature because you can do things with it you can't do with polyphonic or monophonic synthesizers. There are a lot of quirky or random things which happen because of that. But that's actually something some people might want. However what you can do is play a decent synth brass when tuned equally. And that is something you wouldn't expect from a minimoog.
@@torbenanschau6641 Hi Torben - Yes, you're absolutely right, and many people consider quirks as features, it's really great. All I wanted to do was SHOW how paraphony works on the Poly D. Loopop and the others talk about it but didn't demonstrate how it works in practise. I think it's important people know. Having said that, if you know and are happy that's brilliant and many 1000's are. Awesome! 👍
My first synth was the Poly D and my centerpiece is now the Matriarch, which is also a four-voice, paraphonic synth, so clearly I like this style of synth hahaha. Sometimes I wish it had 6 or 8 voices, but when I add reverb or delay I never miss the notes that drop out. I'm tempted to sell my Poly D, but it actually does a couple things that the Matriarch can't so I'm in no rush to sell.
Thank you very much. It's comments like yours that make this worthwhile. So many people think I'm criticising B or the Poly D. As I say - twice - in the video, I'm not. BUT I AM demonstrating how it works, which reviewers seem to ignore. I only wanted to point out how it actually works so buyers can make their own decision. So thank you so much for your ccomment 👍
@@marcuspearson6214 Yeah. You can play it polyphonically if you set all the oscillators the same. I think this was discussed in the Comments here. But that's not always practical or desirable, especially if performing.
Thanks for your review. I already understood the paraphonic way but it is much clearer now. I might get one anyway as I really like it. It's true that paraphony is not very clear on many videos so thanks again.
Hey Mauro - Thank you. I simply wanted to show what other reviews didn't 😁 If you know how it works and are happy, that's great! Glad you found it useful 👍
@@IanWaugh many times we watch reviews just to see the positive sides of a device. It's good to know pro and con in order to consider if it really is what you are looking for.
I mean it has switchable modes so you can set it to the correct setting for your purpose. It’s a fairly basic analog paraphonic synth. I don’t know why you’d expect it to work any differently.
Different manufacturers implement paraphony in slightly different ways. No review explained how it worked on this, hence the video. The fact that it just didn't gel with me isn't what the video is about 😊
Good explanation and fair treatment. I kind of like the creative aspect of the element of chance playing a role in chord construction. However, Behringer could have simply added a switch that would force the lowest note to osc 1, the next lowest to osc 2, etc. That would make things totally predictable, unless I'm overlooking something. They could add that in their little software app.
Hi - Thank you very much. It's been a while since I looked at this and can't recall all the details. A bit of serendipity is fine if you can switch it on and off 😄 But lots of people love it 😊
Too many analogies 😁 It's paraphonic, That's fine. No review DEMONSTRATES how paraphony works on the Poly D. I do in this video. That's all I wanted to demonstrate so potential buyers were not fooled by the 'Poly' in the Poly D or the 'polyphonic claim on Behringer's website.
I have a Prophet 10 so I don’t need polyphony. I saw your other vid where you told me not to buy a Moog Model D so I canceled my order at Sweetwater and picked up one of these instead. I still like the Model D sound and for $4200 less it’s more than good enough for me. Good channel. ;-)
No, now we could say that Poly D is Quadraphonic, since it can generate true quadraphony, which has the ability to use one note per oscillator to add 4 notes, although this has the advantage of assigning a different waveform to each of the notes. Note, remember that poly D has all 6 waveforms on each oscillator just like the Minimoog, so we could never do this on a access virus Ti2 it wouldn't be possible either.(is one example) Only with a Korg monopoly or a Behringer Monopoly. (marvelous) It's really just a mix between a minimoog and a monopoly, although it doesn't have the chord memory, as you can make chords in the sequencer and transpose them with one note, just like a programmable chord memory. It's a great analog piece and most don't buy it for the polyphony but for having a life size minimoog clone, mono, duophonic and quadraphonic, also with distortion and chorus to make sounds acidic and interesting and some purists may feel too old with things like that These things may be out of the ordinary, Behringer actually created some kind of unique and rare minimoog, nothing like this has ever been done before, and the unpleasant results can be happy coincidences (this is also what many are looking for with the sequencer running). So if you were just expecting something similar, like the moog matriarch with a minimoog panel, this is not your instrument. anyway it has an ideal size for homestudio with real size keys and aftertouch, the original minimoog is much worse and more limited and weighs too much and has 44 keys it is a little bulkier, it is not ideal for traveling or placing in places discreet. Finally, it should be mentioned that it can sound identical to the original, it comes uncalibrated from the factory, and you can hack some behaviors of each section of the synthesizer such as filter, oscillators, envelopes, voltages. All this is behind the flip-up panel to use with the screwdriver, great for calibrating. Thank you for this video, i like it.
I couldn't agree more! This problem is the elephant in the room which no one is talking about & is the reason why I was so disapointed with the Poly D once I heard what it's limitations are. It's a good price but for the same price I could get two Model D's which give me *six* oscillators as well as the capability to patch many of the features it has into Eurorack or other in/out featires on other synths too!
Hi Paul - Thank you for your comment 👍 Yes, I have yet to see a review which actually demonstrates the paraphony - hence this video. It's interesting, though, to read some of the comments which seem to think I'm having a go at the Poly D even though I specifically say I'm not at least twice in the video 😀 It's paraphonic. It is what it is. Some folks are happy with it and that's fine. But, like you, it didn't gel with me. Like your idea of two Model Ds 👍
Look it this way. The Poly D is the live performance version of the Model D. It gives you mooglike sound in a stage package, with corresponding limitations. For me, the Poly D lets me switch between bass guitar and synth basslines in a plug in and play package. If you are studio oriented, the Model D is probably much better.
this video is a good info - I myself got 3 times a Model D and connect them with a Doepfer 138s mixer and a cv interface to a master keyboard for full polyphony. There's a helpful YT video on how to do this. And now I'll check out what other videos U have on this channel here ;-) - Gtx from the Lake of Constance
Hey Carlos - Blimey! That's some setup!!! And it would cost you less than the price of an original Mini 😀 Thanks for checking out the videos. Please feel free to ask questions in their Comments sections, if you have any 👍
Yea, I've had this PolyD in my cart a dozen times and have not bought yet. I need to know the dependability after two years use and if the oscillators stay in tune before I buy. Two years means a few hours a day for two years, actually used.
You are welcome. Thousands of people love it but as it has 'Poly' in its name I think some people expect a fully-polyphonic instrument. I just wanted to demonstrate how it actually works 😁
I bought mine during the mega black friday sale and so far its everything I wanted from a synth, atleast a mono paraphonic analog one atleast. I gotta agree with the other comments, you should come into this imagining you're buying a minimoog w/ an extra osc and a keyboard clone opposed to a polyphonic synth BUT shame on behringer for marketing this as true polyphony. IMO this is behringers take on the moog GMA / Matriarch opposed to a minimoog reimagining My main gripes(tbh these arent even that annoying to me so I dont really have a reason to sell right now): -clicky filter env(fixable with slight attack because the envelopes are a little faster than the OG minimoog but its a shame you cant have the knob twisted all the way down) -Why the distortion instead of a time based effect? The distortion is by no means bad, after all its basically a DS-1 circuit, but do they really have to include it in EVERY analog synth they make? half of the sounds of the 80s were magical due to the reverbs and delays of the time. Even the digital spring reverb they had in their 2600 clone wouldve been a better option for the poly D. Better yet why didnt they just give us the delay circuit from the neutron? -The built in sequencer is nice but kinda limited and hard to use :/ Overall though theres many things I do like about the poly D though: -Its def a classic moog sound -The versatility of the poly d for its price point is amazing. Not only do you get harsh moog sounds, you can get Juno stabs, Arp sounding leads (especially with an external spring reverb) and even more modern sounds with the right tweaks and external equipment. Unfortunantly to unlock its full potential you do need some external gear :( -Kind of a weird choice to have built in juno chorus, and its a shame theres not parameters to tweak but its a nice addition (even if it is just the tc electronic clone) -although I got it for leads and basses, the fact that it has the capability of play chords, even if its just paraphony, is really really nice. -External build quality is amazing as always Its a shame that you see this thing getting absolutely destroyed in forums. Sure its not a premium synth but its a very nice piece of kit for its price point. Not knocking on people with legitament dealbreakers like you, im just saying in general people hate on behringer for sometimes no reason at all other than being gear snobs. Even their 25 dollar guitar pedals are really good (coming from someone with a $400 fuzz pedal) If you're looking for a good retro sounding analog synth and dont want to pay an upwards of 1k-2k dollars for something premium, the poly d is fantastic. Obviously listen to the concerns too (for example I do think some of the parts behringer use are a little shaky, I even had a neutron kick the bucket for no reason at all before) but also note that some people have an extreme bias towards cheap gear and if you take care of your equipment and know tricks of trade, you can get a lot of versatility out of even the lowest quality gear. Just look at 90s grunge.
Hey - Thanks for your mini review. Excellent! Coupled with my demo of how its 'poly/para' functions work I think we have the best review out there! 😁 Agree with what you say. B could have done so much more to make this better but, as you say, great VFM Just not for me and. judging from other comments here, not for many others, too. Glad you're enjoying it 👍
Can I note a sound niggle here? I get that most people will be listening to this on tinny laptop speakers or a phone, but on good quality speakers the bass thump every time you hit a key makes the house shake! If you tried miking it further away or just using a direct line from the synth instead, this might make it easier for some of your watchers. thanks!
Thanks, man! I know now to not take the "Poly" part for what the word means! I was researching it and am happy I got to your video. Maybe Monopoly is what I'm looking for.
@@brumusicology Well, there's currently not a massive choice in the polyphonic department and I have no hands-on experience of any other Behringer other than the 2600. The Deep Mind is highly-regarded although a bit menu-divey apparently. There's also the Korg clone, the MonoPoly, but I don't know if that would be polyphonic enough for you. I'd check out reviewes by people you trust and see what they say. I also trust SOS magazine and you may get a more in-depth reviewe on paper. Hope this helps.
Hi - Well, that was all a while ago 😊It wasn't that I needed a Minimoog, I wanted to see what all the fuss was about 😄 Not personally impressed by this or the original - yes, I do sacrilege 😊 - and I have many soft emulations: th-cam.com/video/70k-gG-B5aY/w-d-xo.html
You simply didn't know what paraphonic means. The Poly D is actually amongst the more flexible paraphonic synths as you can chose the oscillator priority. But it obviously will never replace a polyphonic synth. There's a reason why those usually cost a lot more. You may be better suited with Behringer's Deepmind 12 if you want an affordable, fully analog poly synth. But don't expect it to come anywhere close to the flexibility and versatility of the Poly D when it comes to the capabilities of each single oscillator.
Hi Bernie - thanks for checking out the video. As I said, I do know what paraphonic means, I just didn't know how it was implemented on the Poly D but, more to the point, NONE of the reviews I've seen explain exactly what the paraphonic limitations are, at least not as I've shown here. It's not a matter of expecting a poly - although the name is misleading 😱 - but of being told how it works.😀 No interest in the DM although that also generally seems to get good reviews
I agree that the name 'PolyD' is a bad choice for a paraphonic synth. But the limitations of paraphony apply to all paraphonic synths, not just the Poly D. But it may be personal preference. To me, a paraphonic mode is nothing more but a nice additional feature on a mono synth. I buy such an instrument to use it mainly monophonic. Being able to play the occasional pad is nice to have. But what makes the Poly D really interesting to me is that 4th oscillator which the original didn't have. Maybe it would help if you referenced the misleading videos you mentioned. I've seen many YT videos of the Poly D and didn't have the impression they were misleading in terms of the paraphonic mode. Maybe we watched completely different videos. Maybe we simply have different expectations from a paraphonic mono synth.
@@berniem.6965 I simply said I had not seen any reviews which explicitly demonstrated the way paraphony worked on the Poly D, I'm not criticising the Poily D - it's paraphonic and it is what it is. It's great that you and thousands of other s like it
Yes, they really perhaps shouldn't have called "Poly D" and "Para D" wasn't an option...although I wouldn't have cared...can't be worse than "Take 5". I have actually had a couple paraphonics...a Mono/Poly and, my favourite synth of all time, the CS-40m...which I sadly had to part out a couple years ago (although I feel like an organ donor, she lives on! Anyway, ybh when I watched this, I suddenly couldn't remember. I rarely used it. The M/P was so thin sounding with single osc per voice, I just didn't other...it's a huge drone synth though, no need. The Yamaha is duophonic, although that is also paraphonic. Anyway, I sold mine for a couple different reasons; that darned clicking mostly! Yes, some folks are not bothered, others talk about dialing in a bit of attack, yup. Yes, you don't notice it for most patchings, for sure. But on the quiet, subdued, flutey lead sounds that I loved on my Model D (which I sold-out buy the Poly D!)...it drove me crazy. Even on key release it clicks. Still,vit is a great synth; just not the awesome synth it could have been without that click! By now, 1000s of happy users don't even notice it, I get it. Both Carr and Shoebridge warn about it, but we all agree, it's still a very fun, and musical synth. But I need authentic Minimoog patches, so I ran out that same day and replaced my Model D. Also, and I know others disagree, but IMO the Model D is just a tiny but crunchier...and when adding resonance, the Poly D loses more bottom end...like a real Moog...but because it sounds so good, I find it a feature in the Model D to NOT lose that bottom. Both are great synths; the Model D is more authentic, by just a hair. True value.
Hey John - Thanks for your interesting and insightful comment. With this video I simply wanted to demonstrate how it worked rather than just talk about it so people knew what they were getting. Awesome that so many thousands of people love it 👍 I have since considered the Model D but, er, I'm still considering... 😀 A CS-40m - heck! I can appreciate what a loss that must have been. I'm waiting for Mr B to release the long-promised DS-80. Probably appear at the same time as Bladerunner 3 😁
I didnt realise it was paraphonic. I have a Creamware Minimax,and although they say it has DCO's , it is 12 voice polyphonic, and sounds very much like a Moog Minimoog to me.Also the interface is more or less the same as the Minimoog.
Hey jonnno - Thanks for watching. Not come across the Minimax before but it looks really cool. Yes, the Poly D name is misleading and Behringer's site says: "Analog 4-Voice Polyphonic Synthesizer with 37 Full-Size Keys, 4 VCOs..." Bit naughty. The reviews, however, DO point out that it's paraphonic but they don't show how that works if you want to play polyphonically.
There's the other synth called Monopoly by Behringer. I want that but I promised my last synth would be the 2600 by Behringer. I like my 2600 a lot especially for bass
😀 Yes, I have the 2600. Desperately wanted the ARP back in the day but couldn't afford it so this was a no-brainer. Also fancied the original MonoPoly but the Poly D has more features (such as aftertouch and sequencer) so I went with that. The MonoPoly does sound nice.
@@IanWaugh I had the Model D by Behringer and it was my first taste of moog. Then it got traded for Pro1 by Behringer. To now 2600. Behringer made me taste vintage synths and record them. I do want the pro1 back because it’s a nice sounding synth
The demonstration of yours, Ian, made me think that what Uli Behringer did by designing this model was to try to create a rendition of the model D which falls somewhere between the ARP Odyssey and (another the Behringer staff have emulated) the Korg Mono/Poly. That model is itself paraphonic and that it is capable of playing for notes at once but includes a single filter and amplifier for all of them. Sequential and Arteria have themselves come out with their own respective renditions of that architecture. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
Hi Eric - the biggest misnomer is the name,I don't think 'Para D' would have gone down well 😊 Judging by some comments here, some people thought it was a genuine polyphonic synth. Not sure what other synths you are referring to but I think it's fine as long as people know they are para, not poly, and are happy with the way they work.
Thank you, Ian. I was referring to the Arturo’s Poly Brute and the Sequential Pro 3. They are not exactly identical, but I am convinced they share similar architectures.
@@Shred_The_Weapon Ah. I'm not familiar with either, especially the Pro 3 although I believe the Brute is fully polyphonic if that's what you were referring to.
Hey - thanks for checking this out. It doesn't actually 'know' anything. It's the way it's been designed. It's paraphonic, it is what it is and that's the way it works. Not complaining 😀 just pointing out how it works practically, something the reviews just seem to talk about and not show.
I see what you mean... if one doesn't know this beforehand it could be quite a bummer. Well, all instruments have their pros and cons, I guess. It's good to know this before I buy mine TOMORROW, hahahahaha Thank you so much for the video!!! 😍
So, I will stay with the Moog's Model D app on my iPad... It sounds fantastic. If someday I want some analogue poly model D experience, I will go with four Behringer's mono Model D in Poly Chain, real polyphony.
I actually find my Novation KS4 Multi Timbral synthesizer to be more versatile. Although Multi Tiimbral is different than both Paraphonic and Polyphonic, it does allow a lot of versatility in that it is Midi based and in Performance mode, there is a huge versatility in playing either 1 channel or 4 channels simultaneously and each channel, if you want, can be made up of the 3 oscillators, where you are essentially playing 12 at the same time. And the tuning isn't an issue. You can also have a drum rhythm on one channel, a bass on another, and a synth on a third. Lastly, you can split the keyboard where you can have bass notes on the first octave and solo notes on the last 3 (or 4 if you buy the KS5). Along with a drumline as well. It also has the ability to make piano, organ, clavinet, and other sounds. Add to that it's programmable so you can have presets for hundreds of sounds making live playing a whole lot easier. You can even flip between the 4 channels turning them off and on, essentially having 4 different sounding mono synths without changing the preset. Or combining them in any form you want. And it's about half the price of the Poly D. But it would be considered digital.
Hi Jeffrey - Thanks for your super comment. Yes, multi-timbral instruments are very powerful and versatile. My first was the amazing Yamaha SY77 (th-cam.com/video/E6KeWG1ZnM0/w-d-xo.html) which formed the mainstay of my studio in the 90s and there are several pieces of music on this channel which were recorded solely with the SY. For some reason, multi-timbrality seems to have fallen out of favour recently. Some instruments are 2- 4- or maybe 8-part multi-timbral but full 16-part is rare. Novation produces some great gear 👍
@@IanWaugh Hi Ian. Thaks for the reply. I watched the SY77 video. That was definitely a more difficult unit to keep working baseed on it's older technology with the belt drive and battery. The Novation thankfully relies on neither of those. In fact the Novation is fundamentally two circuit boards. The power supply and a main board. Presets are stored in non-volatile memory. I was fortunate in the USA, about 8 years ago, to stumble upon one being sold in Texas locally for $300 plus a large gig bag (which I haven't used). For quite a while I didn't get to play on it much due to jobs but now that I've been retired for several years, I built a studio adjacent to my house for recording. That's when I became more intimate with synthesizers and the varietals. Several other features in the KS4 that make it flexible is both Sustain and Control pedals and being stereo. The keyboard has a great feel with aftertouch. At the time of purchase I honestly had no idea exactly what it was or who Novation was at all. It was a purchase more rooted in an emotional desire to have a synthesizer again as my long ago sold MiniKorg 700 from the 70s was gone. Mainly I play guitar and keyboard was something I always loved but simply didn't have enough time to master. But now coupled with a computer and Studio One DAW and a Midi keyboard as a second with many Synths and other sounds at my disposal, and the KS4, the skies the limit, with any combination of Mono, Poly, Multi Timbral available that way. There is a fascinating video of this man who combined the use of a Keytar, DAW, FM8 plugin (which converts Yamaha DX7 samples to SY samples (as part of his college course) in an effort to replicate Chick Corea's sound. I have the FM8 plugin as well but there are thousands of samples and I was trying to get the man to simply tell me specifically which ones he used to get his sound but no reply as of yet. But it's ok. I moved on to other things. th-cam.com/video/iHuD5StVWko/w-d-xo.html Oh also, a neighbor in my community was giving away a broken P48 Yamaha piano. Cost me $120 to replace the power supply board. Works great now. I keep that in my office though where I mostly use it to practice.
@@cranstjs Hi Jeffrey - You've entered a wonderworld of synths 😊 We have so many hard and soft synths to choose from compared to the 80s, it's difficult to keep up with them all. However, you only need a couple and know how to use them to produce great music. I think some people forget that in their pursuit of the latest gear. I have FM8 as part of Native Instruments' Komplete Kontrol but sadly under-used. Sounds like you have a good set-up 👍
@@IanWaugh By the way, I think you were brilliant to point out the marketing tact of Behringer falsely calling the Paraphonic synth Poly. Even though that synth does sound really good. They also sell another synth (I forget which model) that is multi timbral. I'm not even sure if Behringer sells a full Poly synth. Even the perported Poly Deepmind 12 isn't bi-timbral They do make some interesting products that are attractive in the under $1000 market, but I prefer transparency. I will say that although I like the Novation KS4, it did take an inordinate amount of time for me to absorb the rather lengthy user manual and the assortment of Menu's is rather a minefield of challenges. It took me a long time to understand, in Performance mode, dealing with 4 independent and programmable Channels, to realize the complexity of many of the sub-settings to achieve the sounds I wanted. But once I had them I could at least save presets so I wouldn't have to remember them. Generally I've been more of an old school, give me a knob I can turn quickly so I can get on to making music, not learning how to be a programmer. In spite of my 16 years of working as a computer professional at various jobs. I also used to own a Boss 8 track digital recorder. I hated it. Menus and sub menuts, and sub sub menus. Puke! It was like texting on a flip phone. I fiddled with it a few hours, it collected dust for years, and I sold it on Ebay. Good riddance. Studio One as well has been two years of learning all the complexities of that. And I still consider myself only intermediatte in skills with it. A friend of mine moved on much more quickly with an iPhone, GarageBand, a few pieces of hardware. He's done much more successful recording than I have with less to fiddle with.
@@cranstjs Thank you, Jeffrey 😊 I think the Deep Mind is the only Behringer poly although they have been announcing dozens over the last couple of years - and delivering none! I am very much into one-knob-per-function - which immediately rules out most modern synths! Roland is particulalry fond of the nested sub menu so their recent offerings are nowhere on my list which is a shame as they sound great. Guess they just don't have interface designers, just nerdy programmers who don't know a crotchet from a quaver - no offence intended 😊 Knowing your equipment well - as you do - is a good way to go 👍
Thanks for the video, informative. What happens if you select the lowest option? Does that assign the keys low to high within the chord? So more predictable?
Hi Philip - If you mean low note priority, it just means that the lowest note is prioritised rather than the last note. No longer have the Poly D so can't demo it. If you accept it as a para instrument, it's great but, alas, it's not polyphonic in the normal sense.
3 ปีที่แล้ว +2
Hi! Thanks for your insights! So I think I have been watching all Poly D's videos on TH-cam also and I aprreciate that yours says a "negative" thing. We really need people who critiques the product also, otherwise all videos are just ads. Having said that I found the paraphony on the Poly D pretty neat. I don't play my keys very well and the fact that paraphony introduces some kind of randomnes to my play is amazing to me. It suits me perfectly for my productions. I just wanted to say this, that paraphony may not be as bad as it looks, it's just another feature other than poliphony :)
Hi Juan - Thank you for your comments. As I said in the video, I wasn't criticising the Poly D for being paraphonic - although Behringer does say it's polyphonic - but was wondering why the reviews don't show the limitations of its paraphonic nature. Watching some of the reviews you could easily think, yes, it's paraphonic but it works like a polyphonic. I just wanted to explicitly demonstrate the issue. Paraphony is fine if you know what you're getting. Absolutely agree that it can produce some really interesting variations when you play it. Also works to good advantage when sequenced 👍
@@IanWaugh Thanks for the video and your replies Ian, I just subscribed to your channel since you're not another one of those carbon-copy synths reviewers. I'd like to ask you one more question concerning the Poly D, since I'm currently trying to decide whether to buy it or keep my Lead A1: if I got everything right, to play a perfectly fine, standard chord I only need use the same waveform for all of the oscillators, correct? That is, a paraphonic synth like the Poly D, used that way, should bear the same results as using my A1 in poly mode with a single oscillator (although with many less voices!). Thanks in advance!
@@andy5178 Hi Andy - That's very kind, very much appreciated. I no longer have the Poly D so can't test it specifically, but in both 'poly' modes it splits the oscillators between the notes played so if all oscillators are set to the same waveform and pitch then whichever keys you press, they should play the same sound. We are talking about the Clavia Nord Lead A1? Not sure why you'd want to swap it for a Poly D although you should get a fair amount of change into the bargain 😀 Having said all that, I'm not sure I'd get the Poly D if your sole/main aim is to play polyphonically. As several people have commented, if you embrace its paraphonic nature you can get some interesting results. Hope this helps.
@@IanWaugh Thanks, therefore it should work fine for pads, as long as I don't expect much sonic variety. Again, I can't but agree with you said: reviewers and Behringer themselves should have explained this much, much better. I, for one, owned an MS-20 Mini, which could become a paraphonic (two "voices", specifically) synth thanks to a patchbay trick: but it didn't behave like the Poly D at all. I realise it might seem an unwise decision, but the fact is that I don't use synth sounds that much when playing with my band: and the times I need a polysynth are even less. I do compose some electronic and vaporwavish music at home, but I only use softsynths (my favourite one is the MonoPoly, by the way). So I thought, since the classic Moog layout's much easier to use and the sound's perfect for prog rock, why not give the Poly a chance? Besides, I always dreamed of owning a Moog before Behringer released the Model D, and of a keyboardised Model D once it was out! One thing that many reviewers fail to show is that the A1, whilst being arguably one of the best VA ever made, it's far from user friendly when you need to stack OSCs. The only way to use more than two (and even then, it's just one main plus a predefined second, over which you don't have much control nor choice) is to use the perf mode and stack up to four programs: but that also means working on four programs at once with one set of knobs and a far from analogue-inspired layout. Basically, aside from the many patches I downloaded, I find myself playing most of the time with a single oscillator or two at most. For what I play live (mostly rock), I feel like an amazing monosynth which can also act as a limited pad/string machine would be ideal. For everything else, I rely on my Electro 6.
@@andy5178 Hi Andy - yes, it should sound good and it IS easy to use 😀 Gear is quite individual so if that will suit you better, that's great 👍 I don't know much about the Nords. They seem to get good reviews but they've never really been on my radar for some reason. Anyway, have fun and enjoy your music 🎼
I have only just started to enter the world of synthesizers, I received my behringer poly d last week, I would like to know how we do to connect it to our daw? Knowing that I have a Focusrite 2i2, I have to buy it to wired? Thanks your for alls you do
Hey - Thanks for checking this out and welcome to the wonderful world of synthesisers 😀Connect the Focusrite to your computer via USB. You may have to install dedicated srivers which may come with the unit or which you may have to download from the Focusrite site. This should appear in your DAW as an audio In/Out. Connect the Poly D Output to the Focusrite and the Focusrite Output to speakers or use the headphone Out. Good luck and have fun!👍
@@IanWaugh Thank you very much :) know that since yesterday I watched your videos enormously and I greatly appreciate the content, I even started reading the roland pdf on the synthesis! I have a very quick question, you told me to connect the output of the poly d to the focusrite, but with which cable? a ts, very or just a 6.35 balanced jack, thanks you and again sorry to waste your time with this question, I am in such a hurry to be able to record this magnificent Poly D
@@1eidji652 Glad you're enjoying the videos and finding them helpful. The Roland books will teach you about synthesis but the Poly D has much simpler routing and is not as flexible as a modular system as the booklets describe. I no longer have the Poly D so not sure if it uses balanced or unbalanced cables. All my synths except one are unbalanced and I use unbalanced cables to connect them to a line mixer without problems. Technically, I think either should work but there's no such thing as 100% certainty with audio connections 😀 Personally I'd try unbalanced first.
Hi! I use the Poly D for quite some time now - and I am quite annoyed by the random paraphonic notes...do you know if the Moog Matriarch does the same? Or is there a way that the oscillators are allocated like they should be (low note goes to lowest oscillator and so on)? Thanks in advance!!
Hi - Sorry but I don't know how the Matriarch's paroophony works. You can probably find out by downloading the manual. I don't think the Poly D can assign oscillators as you describe. The app will show the options.
Hi - I don't have a Matriarch, just a more humble - but still awesome 😁 -Grandmother. Paraphony can be implemented differently buy different manufacturers on different instruments so I don't know for sure but I suspect it will work 😁 Yeah, the Poly D is cool as long as you realise it's not a poly 😀 and are happy with the way its paraphony works.
I think those who criticize the paraphony of the Poly D are looking down the wrong end of the telescope. Don't think of it as a cut-down polyphonic synthesizer... Think of it as a juiced up Minimoog. I was fully aware that the Poly D was paraphonic, and I bought it anyway. Honestly, I would have bought it if it were strictly monophonic. I have other keyboards to play that ARE fully polyphonic, but I don't have a Minimoog, and I probably never will, so the Poly D is as close as I'm ever going to get to having that tonal/tactile experience. Also, I've never owned an analog synth. I started playing keys when the DX7 was king, and frankly, all the knobs and switches on analog synthesizers always intimidated me (and so did the prices). I thought the Poly D would be a good way to finally man up and learn how to work an analog synth. Something that software synths and VSTs never inspired in me.
Hey - Thanks for your super comment. Yes, I agree 😊 However, you obviously know how para works but many would-be buyers don't as is evident by some comments here coupled with Behringer's misleading name and the fact that paraphony has never been demonstrated in any review I've seen up to making this video. So as long as you know what you're getting, everything's fine 😊 I started a little while before the DX and my main keyboard for a long time was the Yamaha SY-77. However, I do now much prefer hands-on controls as it makes it easier to edit and manupulate sounds. Agree about most software, though 😱
@@IanWaugh Indeed, Behringer could have done a better job of making it clear that it's paraphonic. Not calling it "Poly D" would have been a good start, but I'd be hard pressed to come up with a name that communicates that its more than a monophonic synth. "Para D", as some have suggested would not be my first choice from a marketing standpoint. It sounds like "Parody". Not a great name for something that's a copy of something else. 😃 Maybe they should have called it the Model D+ or something... I dunno.
Great video Ian. You are the 1% that bought this keyboard for Paraphonic needs. The other 99% of the population bought this synth because we don't have 5000 dollars to get a Mini Moog or a expensive Moog at 2000 to play bass leads. This 600 dollar Poly D does all that and more. Its like getting a perfect cheeseburger and adding condiments like bacon or Jalapenos. Some of us like bacon and some of us don't so we can just strip that off the burger (leave these settings off or alone) With all this being said I am interested in which synth you are using just for soaring leads and which synth you are using for bass lines. Also which synth did you ultimately go for to find the Paraphonic sounds you were looking for?
Hi - Well, not sure if I explained it clearly but I wasn't specifically after a para synth. With the Poly D I wanted a cheap Minimoog 😊 and although I could ignore the para bits, it'd be like buying a car with 5 gears and only using 3. Anyway, the video was just to point out how para works on the Poly D - not seen it clearly explained in any 'review' videos.
Hey Ian, thanks for putting this video together! But a lowcut filter on that "room/voice mic" would really help your audio quality... For instance, when you start playing at around 2:10, something, I guess it's actually your hand/fingers hitting the keys, creates a huge amount of rumble. Cheers - Hans 😅
Hey Hans - Thanks for checking this out and your comments. Yes, a lot could be done to improve most aspects of my videos 😀 but, alas, I am limited by equipment and visual problems so I do the best I can. I think that section was recorded on an old iPhone 😀 I hope it didn't distract too much from the content.
I've only just discovered that it's para not mono. I have the Grandmother and have thought about 'upgrading' but, as you say, the para has put me off. Now double-checking every synth I take a fancy to 😀
Hey Robert - They look cool. I haven't had hands-on so can't say much about them although there are lots of reviews on the net. If you get one, let's know what you think 👍
thanks a lot for explaining this, this was the synth I wanted but this is definitely a major issue as I’m selling for a polyphonic companion to a Grandmother. I still think i’d definitely the be$t alternative to the model D.
Hey Adam - Thanks for watching. Yes, sorry, I guess I could have tuned the oscillators etc., but it can take a little while and that's essentially what you need to do, as described. It's a big faff if you want to play polyphonically
@@IanWaugh it may be, but thats kind of the point of watching vids like these. Informing those that sont have access to a demo to try and better understand what we're in for. I do appreciate u pointing out some of the less obvious cons. Always want to see the flip side of the coin tho.
@@adamkrasneski3679 Point definitely taken, Adam. However, when I made the video, my aim was to show what other reviewers had not shown rather than explain how to make a para synth play polyphonically 😀 If you want true polyphony, this is not for you. If you're happy with a para synth that can fudge polyphony then maybe 😁
Hey Itzhak - Thank you. Paraphony can be implemented in slightly different ways on different synths. The main point is that all voices share some part of the circuit so they might all share the filter or the envelope or both. The Matriarch is not a poly, it's a para 😊 so will have some polyphonic ;limitations but I haven't tried it so can't say exactly how it operates.
@@ItzhakWoolf Essentially, to play a para polyphonically, all the Oscs need to be the same. So if you want to play 4 notes, you'd need to set all 4 Oscs the same, just setting 2 wouldn't do it.
Yes , it should be named as Para D . And , when you play in a '' poly '' mode , only one osc is by the 4 notes . Beside , will be nice if Behringer offer some dif. version , beside that , with real poly ...
Thanks for your comment. Yes indeed, although a lot of users are very happy with it. In a recent comment here Carlos Luíz said he has 3 PolyDs in order to get polyphony! Pure Ambient Drone has just made a video about the lack of poly synths from Behringer. I don't see a real polyphonic Poly D coming along, though...
Thanks for watching - Yes, I guess I could have done - that would have been even MORE stuff the reviews don't tell you 😀 It was just intended to be a heads-up for anyone who wondered how paraphony worked on the Poly D. Yes, the Model D is supposed to be great but I have no personal experience there.
The name is the main thing I dislike about this synth. It may be the best version of an analogue Model D *monosynth* out there (extra osc etc).. but it causes so much confusion with people thinking it's a true fully articulated polyphonic, rather than paraphonic-polyphonic (let's shorten to paraphonic like anyone sensible does) I'll probably pick one up used in protest and get a "Para D" badge for it The other reason the name annoys me is.. people have been asking for a true polysynth made out of Model D voices for years.. Behringer had a great opportunity to actually do that! Para D could have been this.. then Poly D could have been the full 8 voice poly
Ha! Ha! I'd love to see a photo of that 😁 I guess you could save money and photoshop it. Someone probably has. Yes, indeed, it could cause confusion and, yes, Behringer did miss an opportunity. But thousands of people love it and that's great, too!
DUDE... What are you thinking?? This is a COPY of a MINIMOOG. It's a COPY, with an arp, and a sequencer, and an extra oscillator. It's a COPY PLUS. That's all it is. You're nattering on because it's not a Sequential, basically. Hello? It's SEVEN HUNDRED DOLLARS, and it's a frighteningly close replica of the Minimoog, which is currently reissued in 2022 at a price of FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS. Do you have issues with the Minimoog as well? I just don't understand what you wanted from this. Did it occur to you that, by making the oscillators tunable to an octave plus or minus, that might have meant sacrificing the ability to sound almost exactly like a Minimoog? ::::sigh:::: I just feel like... you're really missing the point here.
It might help if you watch the video - or re-watch it. I say a couple of times that I'm not criticising the Poly D. I don't know how much clearer I can be. I made the video to *demonstrate* how paraphony works on the Poly D. Other reviewers talk the talk but don't actually SHOW how it works. That's it. But it just didn't suit me. Thousands of Poly D owners are very happy with it and that's great. I don't have a problem with anyone liking or buying any synth 😊 We're all here to make music 👍
I was like: "so...? .... so? .... so what?" until it got to the "I've never owned a paraphonic synthesiser before". Ah OK, that makes sense now. Not the best paraphonic synth to get as your first synth. Makes total sense now.
Hi - Wasn't particularly looking to get a para as such, just a cheap Minimoog 😀 But essentially made the video because I hadn't seen a review that actually SHOWS and demonstrates how paraphony works on the Poly D. I think people should know so they can make an informed decision 👍
@@IanWaugh Yeah, for sure. There are written descriptions, but these days people just don't read any more. Also, they are a little dry and technical so for anyone just getting into hardware synths a video that breaks it all down is definitely better, kudos for doing that. And PolyD is quirky in more ways than one, it's definitely not for everyone.
Hey David - Well, I did say I know what paraphony is, that different manufacturers implement it in different ways but I wasn't sure how it was implemented on the Poly D as no one had bothered to actually demonstrate it before 😊So not sure where your confusion lies...
@@IanWaugh just some of the comments you made about what you wanted to do with the paraphony - things like having oscillators tuned to different pitches or unison slightly detuned. (6.00) That's not how paraphony works you can only do that with a true polyphonic synth that has multiple oscillators assigned to each note. There are one or two paraphonic synths that will allow you to do something like assign two oscillators to one voice but that kind of halfway house halves the paraphony so you still wouldn't be able to play your three note chord example. Its not a terribly common way of doing things but the Vermona Perfourmer has such a two oscillator per note mode. Much more expensive synth too of course.
@@DaveBessell I see the confusion. I didn't say I was expecting to do that on the Poly D, I was simply saying if you have 4 Oscillators that's the sort of thing you might expect. Maybe I didn't phrase it well but I was having a little go at B calling it Poly when it;s really a Para 😊
Don't know just seems like the classic uninformed consumer. You're pretty old to be into synths and not have encountered this before, this is definitely not the first synth made like this. Funny thing is they could have made changes to make it a normal polyphonic design but that would have affected it in ways that would have had a true negative affect on what they were trying to do. I would guess you dislike the MonoPoly in both forms (Korg or Behringer)?
🤣 Well, that's pretty rude. It sounds like you haven't watched the video or understood why I made it. I didn't realise there was an age limit on liking synths. Have you told Rick Wakeman and Jean-Michel Jarre ? 😊
Behringer should never have called it the "Poly" D. What a misnomer. That they threw a Juno-style chorus on there shows they were insecure with the paraphony's 1-osc-per-voice and felt the need to give the option to beefen that up. While not a true polyphonic Model D, it's nonetheless amazing to essentially get a Minimoog (if you use it in mono mode) for this price. If you really want a true polyphonic minimoog, I think you can daisy chain Behringer's "Model D" units to accomplish that.
Thank you for your comment. Yes, they took a bit of a liberty with the name 😮 But lots of people love it which is fine. I just wanted to demonstrate how the para modes work in practise. Many people say they prefer the Model D although some say the controls are a little cramped. Lots of choice 👍😀
@@IanWaugh Yes, the Model D is very small! I was surprised when I saw it in person. Seeing pictures I hadn't realizes it has micro-sized knobs. Thanks for the video. It's a good demonstration of this key shortcoming.
Hey Lincoln - Thanks for checking this out. I'm simply saying I have not seen any videos demonstrating the issues of paraphony. They talk but don't show.
At last! Someone that understands me! I didn't knew this when I bought it... I kinda hate this too... I didn't knew this "paraphonic" thing before purchasing it and is good that you point it out because yes... As you said, NO ONE speaks about this when they review it.
@@SuchaDoofus Hi Oliver - sound advice! But I think most people rely on YT reviews - at least I do 😁 But none actually SHOWED how paraphony worked on this one so hoping this video helps.
Hey Rayy - I totally agree. Although this wasn't a review, I was simply showing how paraphony works on the Poly D. Other reviews tell you but don't show you 😁😁
loopop mentions this paraphonic behavior in his review, and this is the most popular review on youtube for this synth, you didn't need to watch every video mate, just pay attention *wink-wink*
Hey Dave - Thanks for watching 👍 Yes, there are software alternatives for most hardware synths but there's something about hands-on knob-twiddling that many people find good for creativity. Including me 🤣 However, most folks can't afford all the hardware gear and, as you say, software can do much more than hardware. I have the MiniMoog in Arturia's V Collection and it's great! Starsky Carr has done several video comparisons on the Mini - here's just one you might find interesting: th-cam.com/video/S1h07ws--CM/w-d-xo.html
I am looking for a cheap synthesizers. Whether poly or Holy. I just want to have fun. to become happy . Which you can recommend me, you have so many .What is good for fun danke Mr.
Hey Mr - Personally, for fun I like one-knob-per-function synths as they are easy to use. But synths which have menues (typically digital) often have super presets. For cheapness, it's difficult to beat Behringer. Difficult to suggest synths to look at with out more information. There are hundreds avaiable. Check out synth reviews - you'll get loads of ideas.
@@mr.engizmemo9997 The Deep Mind is more polyphonic 😁 but the MonoPoly and Poly D will be easier to use as they don't have a LCD. Some users have said the DM is a bit menu-divy but I haven't tried any of these synths so can't comment.
Feels like you were actually looking for a 4 Osc 4 note poly ... whereas in poly mode this is effectively a single Osc 4 note unit ... for the money and it’s sound there really is nothing close
Hey Paul - Thanks for your comment. I wasn't looking for anything specific, I was just wondering how paraphony worked on the Poly D as no review seems to demonstrate it in the way I have - hence the video. 😁 If you're happy with the way it works it's a great VFM synth and thousands of people love it 👍
@@IanWaugh I think for a poly mode of what you are looking for you need 16 osc .. something like an analog 4 style .. para is just scattering the osc around the keys you press ..
@@synkuk Well, Paul, I wasn't particularly looking for a poly. It does say Poly in the name which is a bit naughty but I knew it was para, just not sure how it had been implemented as no one had demonstrated it 😀 Paraphonic seems to be interpreted slightly differently by different companies. I think we all agree on 'polyphonic' - apart from Behringer 😀 Paraphonic can be ok but this just didn't suit the way I work.
These are all monophonic synths which can be thought of as expanded mono with creative workflows...but it is NOTa polysynth. I don't buy analog polysynths, digital are far better and full of notes you can play, like my Roland Gaia, 64 notes of poly and I use every one. For chords with overlapping long envelopes you need lots of voices. I do want this synth, for the creative voices, four beautiful musical oscillators and all analog sounds for the sweetest leads you can imagine.
Hey - Thanks for checking this out. I'm not an analogue purist, for me it's the sound at the end of the day that matters so tend to agree 😀 If you like digital, there are lots of software clones you might find interesting. Starsky Carr has a few videos comparing them all and I'm sure he probably compares this with the original, too 👍
@@WildernessMusic_GentleSerene Yes, I saw that. Very interested in the Boutique version. Spoke to Roland and they have the only two models in the UK at the moment!. Most retailers are quoting a January delivery. Not sure whether to jump on the pre-order wagon or wait until they actually arrive - and probably immediately sell out! 😀
@@IanWaugh I missed the Juno when it first came out, but the JX--08 may be a better synth with 2 oscillators, 24 voices, a sine wave LFO, two envelopes and the triple chorus effects.
There seems to be two types of synth enthusiasts. The first type wants everything vintage as it was and they enjoy limitations in a way because it makes things simple and straight forward. The other type hates limitations with creativity and wants to push the limits. I'm similar to you and limitations like this just frustrate me. It was a different story back in the 70's when these synths were considered the most advanced for the time. Now in 2023 it just feels like limiting capabilities on purpose. They do sound great for what they do but ultimately they have limits on what type of sounds you can make with them. Prophet 5 with all it's glory is limited to 5 voices and sequential sells expansion cards to make it 10. That makes little sense to me for a new remake.
Hi - That's an interesting division. Yes, I also find it strange that re-issues and clones often do little to add to the original features. I guessit takes all sorts... 😊
If you liked this video, you might like this one, too: th-cam.com/video/eksVtiA0XV4/w-d-xo.html
It’s a mini moog with an extra oscillator and Juno chorus. I bought it for that.
Good stuff! 👍
And are you happy?
Plus you don't have to sell both your kidneys, your arm, your leg AND your firstborn to afford it. And for the price that thing is built solid and sturdy. It's also heavy as heck and no plastic bomber like a Roland GAIA for example. My ONLY complaint is they should have added a multi-effect from Klark & Technik like they did in the Odyssey Clone.
@@KRAFTWERK2K6 Yes, many clones would benefit from modern enhancements..
but it doesn't sound as good as a mini moog though. still sounds good, but not THAT good
Ah! I get you. Yes, this can be disappointing if you expect something else. I see my Poly D more as a mono synth with 4 OSCs, which makes it even more powerful than a Mini Moog. And as the icing on the cake, I can also play chords when I tune the OSCs correctly. Btw., it can create very lush and warm Juno type chords with the on-board Chorus. The main limitation that bothers me in this respect are the 4 "voices" which is often not enough for augmented chords. So you have to carefully pick the voicing: root, third, seven and then the augmented degree.
Hey - Thanks for checking this out. I was more disappointed by the fact that none of the reviews showed, in the way I have, how paraphony works on the Poly D than the fact that it is paraphonic. It is what it is (although Behringer does actually call it polyphonic) and it's great that so many people like it. I think if it had been mono I might have kept it - which may seem odd as you can, of course, simply use it in mono mode - but it was sort of like buying a car with 5 gears but only able to use 3 😀
@@IanWaugh Yep, I can totally feel you. By calling it even polyphonic (let alone the name Poly D), Behringer somehow spoiled it for many people.
@@IanWaugh -- absolutely. I got a different paraphonic synth (the MonoPoly) and found the same issue; I similarly accepted it as just part of the design. But today I watched two different vid on the Poly D, and both featured demonstrations which included playing chords faultlessly -- just like a poly -- so your vid seems to be desperately needed as antidote to the glossy, problem-free chords seen in other vids.
@@Jobotubular That's all I was trying to do so thank you very much. It's such a basic and essential aspect of the instrument, it's surprising that other reviews don't mention it... 😲
@@IanWaugh I think I'm buying the Model D (no keyboard now, apparently they used to offer it in keyboard version) and also the Pro 800; returning my Prophet 10 module.
i've probably spent over an hour watching videos and reading about paraphonic synths in the last few months and honestly i never understood it well until i saw this video. thank you very much! i liked and subscribed :)
That's very kind, thank you very much. Glad it was helpful 👍
Calling it the Para D would've been too perfect.
It must have been a name they considered and discarded 😀
@Rhizosphere It would have been different... 😀
Model P
I think the Paraphonic nature of this synth, sets it apart. It’s a reason to buy it, rather than yet another Mini-Moog reproduction.
I applaud the difference!
Hey Chris - Yes, it does more than a Minimoog 😊 As long as folks know how it works and are happy, that's great! 👍
I feel like Behringer started out aiming to build a keyboard version of their Model D module, and later decided to add paraphony as an extra feature to set it apart from all the other monos and Moog clones on the market. Consequently buyers more interested in it as a monosynth were likely more satisfied than those primarily expecting to use it like a polyphonic synth. Arguably it should have been called "Para-D".
Yes, I think you're right. If it had been a mono synth I might have been happier 🤣
I think when they were working on their MonoPoly clone, they decided to make the Poly D work the same way because the paraphony works just like MonoPoly and it's the same size/format. Poly D is basically the MonoPoly if it were made by Moog instead of Korg.
Thank you for the demonstration and for explaining this so clearly! I'm considering buying a Poly D, but haven't previously owned a paraphonic synth, so this was very useful :)
Glad you found it useful 👍
I've owned a poly D since October 2020.. it is an awesome synth but i find myself really only using it for its mono function. It's really not practical for recording chords when making songs. For $800 I knew something had to be lacking. Glad to see a video clearly talking about the poly function and the problems that occurs with it. I'm saving up to get a Juno 60 so i can make sweet, buttery and in tune chords... great video!
Thank you for your kind comments. I was tempted to keep it and use it solely as a mono synth but I think that would be like getting a car and never putting it in top gear 😀 The sounds are otherwise excellent.
Hey, not to be mister butt-in, but, for the money, I think the DeepMind 12 is an amazing poly synth. Almost a year in and it's still fresh every time I start messing around. That's my two pence.
Thanks for your comment. Always good to get input from users. I think most Behringer stuff is fantastic VFM.@@nerfytheclown
Get a deepmind 12. It’s deeper than the juno
good to know that mono would be the most realistic expectation of poly-d. i do love my model-d so i might just stay put there. wondering if you considered the juno ju-06 boutique and how that fairs for this use?
This was the strong point years ago on the Korg Mono/Poly and creating random weird sequences with different waveforms and settings on each oscillator .
Yes, some users like it for that 😊
I had watched enough demos and reviews to know this before I bought my Poly D early last year, so I did not go into this expecting it to be a polyphonic Minimoog clone. In fact, I rarely use mine paraphonically. Instead, I use it as an affordable Minimoog Model D -- monophonic, like the original -- but WITH AN EXTRA OSCILLATOR! So for me, it's just a Model D with extra spice that I didn't need to pawn anything else to get, and I'm still quite happy with that purchase.
But I think it's great that you've made this video, Ian, to help others who are considering purchasing a Poly D understand what it really is they'll be buying, so thanks for doing it mate!
Thank you, Bob. Yes, as long as you know what it is, that's fine 😊 And you have the right approach. But not everyone does as is evident by many comments. Of cours, the name doesn't help 😄
What you're essentially saying is "I'm disappointed that my Poly-D doesn't work like an Oberheim 4-voice, with 4 completely independent synth chains that behave the same no matter how I play." That's not how it's designed, and it's never going to do that Even a Deepmind 12--while far better suited as a true polysynth--doesn't really have that kind of capability. You should just buy a Cherry Audio 8-Voice VST, and it will do exactly what you want.
The rest of us are happy to get a 4-oscillator true analog MiniMoog clone with a sequencer, arpeggiator and chorus (and some limited poly capability) for a fifth of what an original costs.
😁 What I'm saying is: This is how parophony/polyphony works on the Poly D, demonstrated in a way I have not seen in any other review 😁 Great that you and thousands of other like it 👍
Not the best example the Oberheim 4-voice though. It may have 4 complete voices, making it truly polyphonic, but happens to be the one actual synth with totally independent controls and behavior for each voice. It's basically four SEM modules polychained, therefore it would have exactly the same random voice allocation "problem" (or creative use) as the PolyD or Monopoly while trying to play chords, only much more demanding as you have to tune each complete voice to exactly the same sound, not just the oscillators.The Vermona Perfourmer is another equivalent modern example.
@@MyriadOfHoops Thank you for your comment, that's interesting and very useful and helpful.
@@MyriadOfHoops I know how a 4-Voice works. I chose it because it's one of the only synths ever that actually has 4 voices which are truly independent of each other, in sound and every other respect. Of course, you're right in that if you set them to four different sounds than playing chords or even melodies will get strange effects. Any standard polysynth like a Jupiter-8 or Prophet will give you multiple but identical voices which are also independent in filter and envelope articulation, but are all basically the same sound. But a 4-Voice or Poly-D lets you select different sounds for each voice, which is what I think he says that he wants here. For example, in a 4-Voice or Poly-D, you can set each voice oscillator to a different octave and waveform--something that nearly any other polysynth can't do, but a 4-Voice can. But, unlike a Poly-D, a 4-Voice will also have proper filter and envelope articulation for each voice, regardless of the sounds.
If what he really wants is just something like a Prophet, than that's what he should buy--or a DeepMind 6 if he is on a budget and wants to stay with Behrenger.
@@geoffk777 Sure I'm hip with all the differences, having examples of each kind, but what I understood from the video is the opposite of what you're saying here : Ian was not necessarily disappointed with the lack of distinct voice articulation per se on the Poly D, but specifically about random voice allocation with disparate oscillator tones. He actually hoped voices would sound the same by default across a chord. So even tones being precisely the thing even more tedious to achieve with an Oberheim 4 voice, I was therefore surprised you picked exactly that one as an example of what he would have wanted from the Poly D. I understand now that we interpreted things each the opposite way :)
PS : another route than proper polyphonic synths, with actually usable paraphony and even tone would be things like the Korg Delta or Moog Opus 3, kind of glorified organs/string machines, not limited in the number of playable notes, with a single filter/enveloppe LFO added for synthy results
This is the only sonic testing of the difference between polyphonic & paraphonic
I have watched forty minute discussions without a clear answer
I thought the issue was with the single filter and amp circuit?
Hi Ruby - Yes, that is the issue, because the oscillators share the signal path. I just wanted to show the practical limitations of such a system as, like you, I have not seen it demonstrated before. Glad you found it useful.
This is exactly the video I was looking for. Everyone is so vague about the paraphonicness, but you sir, are not. You are doing gods work, thank you.
Ha! Ha! Thank you, Andrew. Yes, this puzzled me, too, hence the video. Glad it helped 👍
Paraphonic synths are a world for themselves, and it is obvious that it can be a little disappointing for someone who expects polyphony. But paraphonics has its own characteristic, which on the other side can't be done with many polyphonic ones. You trigger the envelopes with the first key and holding one of the keys, you can create a soft chord progression without re-triggering envelopes again (like playing a distorted/sustained e-guitar picking a string and then sliding around without picking it again). By the other hand, you can create an arpeggio which changes the oscillator characteristics on each step. Paraphonic top octave synths (mainly strings, organs and harmoniums) offered the possibility to play as many keys as you can simultaneously, what in days of monophonic or 4x- and 6x- polyphonic synths, allowed you to play full two-handed chords to create rich pads on such devices. For another example, the iconic VP-330 needs this (dis-)advantage to create so lovely vocalizations that wouldn't be possible if at each melody note a new envelope would be triggered. I will buy this Synth because of its lack of displays and menus, it's straight analog sound shaping, the simple sequencer and the "extra" paraphonics, without getting lost and losing the spontaneity while diving in the deep parameter oceans of my VA-Synths.
Hi Achim - Yes, all good points. Paras are a separate genre. But I wanted to demonstrate how it worked on a synth which calls itself a 'Poly', Many potential buyers (according to comments) thought it was a real poly.
Yeah I saw LoopOp mentioned this and was one of the reasons I didn’t get it. He doesn’t go really into it and if I remember correctly he just says fairly quickly and nonchalantly that you never know which oscillator you’re gonna get which can be good or bad depending… whatever… something else. I guess if you tune all 4 oscillators to the same range then it doesn’t matter which one you get but that’s not the reason I’d get a Poly D. Hence I didn’t get it
Yes, that's how to get it to play as a Poly but it's not what I want from a synth, either. Lots of folk are happy, though, which is fine. The reason for making the video was exactly as you describe - I haven't seen a review that actually shows how paraphony works on the Poly D 😶 Glad you found it helpful.
@@IanWaugh I agree on pargo, Loopop did that, and some others as well also you could read it. It was almost stated everyhwere it is not a polyphonic but a paraphonic. It was a little goodie before the monopoly was introduced. So being "only paraphonic" this was actually a feature because you can do things with it you can't do with polyphonic or monophonic synthesizers. There are a lot of quirky or random things which happen because of that. But that's actually something some people might want. However what you can do is play a decent synth brass when tuned equally. And that is something you wouldn't expect from a minimoog.
@@torbenanschau6641 Hi Torben - Yes, you're absolutely right, and many people consider quirks as features, it's really great. All I wanted to do was SHOW how paraphony works on the Poly D. Loopop and the others talk about it but didn't demonstrate how it works in practise. I think it's important people know. Having said that, if you know and are happy that's brilliant and many 1000's are. Awesome! 👍
My first synth was the Poly D and my centerpiece is now the Matriarch, which is also a four-voice, paraphonic synth, so clearly I like this style of synth hahaha. Sometimes I wish it had 6 or 8 voices, but when I add reverb or delay I never miss the notes that drop out. I'm tempted to sell my Poly D, but it actually does a couple things that the Matriarch can't so I'm in no rush to sell.
Good stuff! It's great that you have a couple of synths you like 👍
So have you sold the Poly D?
@@Gjallarhorn84 No I still have the Poly D. It doesn’t get a ton of use but I still love having it.
I found this information extremely useful and will reconsider acquiring one. Thank you so much.
Thank you very much. It's comments like yours that make this worthwhile. So many people think I'm criticising B or the Poly D. As I say - twice - in the video, I'm not. BUT I AM demonstrating how it works, which reviewers seem to ignore. I only wanted to point out how it actually works so buyers can make their own decision. So thank you so much for your ccomment 👍
@@IanWaugh yes . i agree and im glad you took the trouble to put this up too .
@@alexhutton3569 Thank you, Alex.
Thanks for this insight, its really informative.
Thank you, Marcus. Glad you found it useful.
@@IanWaugh I was looking at getting one of these, mainly as a polysynth to perform with, but the paraphony problem would just wind me up a treat
@@marcuspearson6214 Yeah. You can play it polyphonically if you set all the oscillators the same. I think this was discussed in the Comments here. But that's not always practical or desirable, especially if performing.
Thanks for the video. It’s a deal breaker for me too.
Thank you, Dom. Glad you found it useful.
Thanks for your review. I already understood the paraphonic way but it is much clearer now. I might get one anyway as I really like it. It's true that paraphony is not very clear on many videos so thanks again.
Hey Mauro - Thank you. I simply wanted to show what other reviews didn't 😁 If you know how it works and are happy, that's great! Glad you found it useful 👍
@@IanWaugh many times we watch reviews just to see the positive sides of a device. It's good to know pro and con in order to consider if it really is what you are looking for.
@@Marion0142 Yes, I totally agree. Thanks for watching 👍
I mean it has switchable modes so you can set it to the correct setting for your purpose. It’s a fairly basic analog paraphonic synth. I don’t know why you’d expect it to work any differently.
Different manufacturers implement paraphony in slightly different ways. No review explained how it worked on this, hence the video. The fact that it just didn't gel with me isn't what the video is about 😊
Good explanation and fair treatment. I kind of like the creative aspect of the element of chance playing a role in chord construction. However, Behringer could have simply added a switch that would force the lowest note to osc 1, the next lowest to osc 2, etc. That would make things totally predictable, unless I'm overlooking something. They could add that in their little software app.
Hi - Thank you very much. It's been a while since I looked at this and can't recall all the details. A bit of serendipity is fine if you can switch it on and off 😄 But lots of people love it 😊
@@IanWaugh The Behringer Poly D definitely does more than an original Minimoog.
@@SuperheroJunior It does and it's much cheaper 👍
As someone who uses a Talkbox and has an interest in this synth. Monophonic works perfectly for me.
Hey Mike - if it works for you, that's great 👍
I 'm just a bit confused by the conclusion above. It's a bit like buying a unicycle and then complaining that you can't do wheelies on it.
Too many analogies 😁 It's paraphonic, That's fine. No review DEMONSTRATES how paraphony works on the Poly D. I do in this video. That's all I wanted to demonstrate so potential buyers were not fooled by the 'Poly' in the Poly D or the 'polyphonic claim on Behringer's website.
I have a Prophet 10 so I don’t need polyphony. I saw your other vid where you told me not to buy a Moog Model D so I canceled my order at Sweetwater and picked up one of these instead. I still like the Model D sound and for $4200 less it’s more than good enough for me. Good channel. ;-)
Thank you John, much appreciated. Glad you find the videos useful 👍
thank you for the professionalism
Thank you for watching 😊
No, now we could say that Poly D is Quadraphonic, since it can generate true quadraphony, which has the ability to use one note per oscillator to add 4 notes, although this has the advantage of assigning a different waveform to each of the notes.
Note, remember that poly D has all 6 waveforms on each oscillator just like the Minimoog, so we could never do this on a access virus Ti2 it wouldn't be possible either.(is one example) Only with a Korg monopoly or a Behringer Monopoly. (marvelous)
It's really just a mix between a minimoog and a monopoly, although it doesn't have the chord memory, as you can make chords in the sequencer and transpose them with one note, just like a programmable chord memory.
It's a great analog piece and most don't buy it for the polyphony but for having a life size minimoog clone, mono, duophonic and quadraphonic, also with distortion and chorus to make sounds acidic and interesting and some purists may feel too old with things like that
These things may be out of the ordinary, Behringer actually created some kind of unique and rare minimoog, nothing like this has ever been done before, and the unpleasant results can be happy coincidences (this is also what many are looking for with the sequencer running).
So if you were just expecting something similar, like the moog matriarch with a minimoog panel, this is not your instrument.
anyway it has an ideal size for homestudio with real size keys and aftertouch, the original minimoog is much worse and more limited and weighs too much and has 44 keys it is a little bulkier, it is not ideal for traveling or placing in places discreet.
Finally, it should be mentioned that it can sound identical to the original, it comes uncalibrated from the factory, and you can hack some behaviors of each section of the synthesizer such as filter, oscillators, envelopes, voltages.
All this is behind the flip-up panel to use with the screwdriver, great for calibrating.
Thank you for this video, i like it.
Hi - Thanks for your Comment. Yes, you can do some clever things with it. Glad you like it 👍
Very useful video, Ian 🙏🏻
Thank you, Andreas, glad you found it helpful 👍
You are absolutely spot on. My thoughts exactly.
Thank you, Christian 👍
Muchas gracias por tú explicación... Ahora tengo más claro sobre la parafonía... 😊🙏
So glad it was helpful 👍
I couldn't agree more! This problem is the elephant in the room which no one is talking about & is the reason why I was so disapointed with the Poly D once I heard what it's limitations are. It's a good price but for the same price I could get two Model D's which give me *six* oscillators as well as the capability to patch many of the features it has into Eurorack or other in/out featires on other synths too!
Hi Paul - Thank you for your comment 👍 Yes, I have yet to see a review which actually demonstrates the paraphony - hence this video. It's interesting, though, to read some of the comments which seem to think I'm having a go at the Poly D even though I specifically say I'm not at least twice in the video 😀 It's paraphonic. It is what it is. Some folks are happy with it and that's fine. But, like you, it didn't gel with me. Like your idea of two Model Ds 👍
Look it this way. The Poly D is the live performance version of the Model D. It gives you mooglike sound in a stage package, with corresponding limitations. For me, the Poly D lets me switch between bass guitar and synth basslines in a plug in and play package. If you are studio oriented, the Model D is probably much better.
@@nicbrownable Hey Nic - Yes indeed. Poly D and Model D will suit many musicians who have different requirements.
Thanks for the explanation! Greetings from Hamburg, Germany.
Thank you, Felix 👍
Thank you so much Thatha 💟
Thanks, Aaron, glad you found it helpful 👍
this video is a good info - I myself got 3 times a Model D and connect
them with a Doepfer 138s mixer and a cv interface to a master keyboard
for full polyphony. There's a helpful YT video on how to do this. And
now I'll check out what other videos U have on this channel here ;-) -
Gtx from the Lake of Constance
Hey Carlos - Blimey! That's some setup!!! And it would cost you less than the price of an original Mini 😀
Thanks for checking out the videos. Please feel free to ask questions in their Comments sections, if you have any 👍
Yea, I've had this PolyD in my cart a dozen times and have not bought yet. I need to know the dependability after two years use and if the oscillators stay in tune before I buy. Two years means a few hours a day for two years, actually used.
Yes, a good question but, alas, I cannot help as I returned mine 😊
Interesting.... I did NOT know this. I might wanna hold off on buying, thanks for the heads up. Subscribed 👍
You are welcome. Thousands of people love it but as it has 'Poly' in its name I think some people expect a fully-polyphonic instrument. I just wanted to demonstrate how it actually works 😁
I bought mine during the mega black friday sale and so far its everything I wanted from a synth, atleast a mono paraphonic analog one atleast. I gotta agree with the other comments, you should come into this imagining you're buying a minimoog w/ an extra osc and a keyboard clone opposed to a polyphonic synth BUT shame on behringer for marketing this as true polyphony. IMO this is behringers take on the moog GMA / Matriarch opposed to a minimoog reimagining
My main gripes(tbh these arent even that annoying to me so I dont really have a reason to sell right now):
-clicky filter env(fixable with slight attack because the envelopes are a little faster than the OG minimoog but its a shame you cant have the knob twisted all the way down)
-Why the distortion instead of a time based effect? The distortion is by no means bad, after all its basically a DS-1 circuit, but do they really have to include it in EVERY analog synth they make? half of the sounds of the 80s were magical due to the reverbs and delays of the time. Even the digital spring reverb they had in their 2600 clone wouldve been a better option for the poly D. Better yet why didnt they just give us the delay circuit from the neutron?
-The built in sequencer is nice but kinda limited and hard to use :/
Overall though theres many things I do like about the poly D though:
-Its def a classic moog sound
-The versatility of the poly d for its price point is amazing. Not only do you get harsh moog sounds, you can get Juno stabs, Arp sounding leads (especially with an external spring reverb) and even more modern sounds with the right tweaks and external equipment. Unfortunantly to unlock its full potential you do need some external gear :(
-Kind of a weird choice to have built in juno chorus, and its a shame theres not parameters to tweak but its a nice addition (even if it is just the tc electronic clone)
-although I got it for leads and basses, the fact that it has the capability of play chords, even if its just paraphony, is really really nice.
-External build quality is amazing as always
Its a shame that you see this thing getting absolutely destroyed in forums. Sure its not a premium synth but its a very nice piece of kit for its price point. Not knocking on people with legitament dealbreakers like you, im just saying in general people hate on behringer for sometimes no reason at all other than being gear snobs. Even their 25 dollar guitar pedals are really good (coming from someone with a $400 fuzz pedal)
If you're looking for a good retro sounding analog synth and dont want to pay an upwards of 1k-2k dollars for something premium, the poly d is fantastic. Obviously listen to the concerns too (for example I do think some of the parts behringer use are a little shaky, I even had a neutron kick the bucket for no reason at all before) but also note that some people have an extreme bias towards cheap gear and if you take care of your equipment and know tricks of trade, you can get a lot of versatility out of even the lowest quality gear. Just look at 90s grunge.
Hey - Thanks for your mini review. Excellent! Coupled with my demo of how its 'poly/para' functions work I think we have the best review out there! 😁 Agree with what you say. B could have done so much more to make this better but, as you say, great VFM Just not for me and. judging from other comments here, not for many others, too. Glad you're enjoying it 👍
Perfect!! Thank you so much!! Better get a deepmind 6!!
Good choice 👍
If you select low note for priority, don’t you get always the same assignment of oscillator from low to high note? That would solve it..
I mentioned and demonstrated this in the video - alas, not.
Can I note a sound niggle here? I get that most people will be listening to this on tinny laptop speakers or a phone, but on good quality speakers the bass thump every time you hit a key makes the house shake! If you tried miking it further away or just using a direct line from the synth instead, this might make it easier for some of your watchers. thanks!
Hi - Point noted but the video and sound are up and I can't change it.
Thanks, man! I know now to not take the "Poly" part for what the word means! I was researching it and am happy I got to your video. Maybe Monopoly is what I'm looking for.
Glad it helped. I haven't tried a Model D but it is reckoned to be great, if a little fiddly if you have large hands 😁
@@IanWaugh can you recommend a polyphonic synth made by behringer?
@@brumusicology Well, there's currently not a massive choice in the polyphonic department and I have no hands-on experience of any other Behringer other than the 2600. The Deep Mind is highly-regarded although a bit menu-divey apparently. There's also the Korg clone, the MonoPoly, but I don't know if that would be polyphonic enough for you. I'd check out reviewes by people you trust and see what they say. I also trust SOS magazine and you may get a more in-depth reviewe on paper. Hope this helps.
HI Ian if your going to send the poly D back, what would you get in it's place?
Hi - Well, that was all a while ago 😊It wasn't that I needed a Minimoog, I wanted to see what all the fuss was about 😄 Not personally impressed by this or the original - yes, I do sacrilege 😊 - and I have many soft emulations: th-cam.com/video/70k-gG-B5aY/w-d-xo.html
Good job Ian.
Thank you Rod 😊
Does the poly d have a round Robin mode? (Moog matriarch has this as an option)
Not as far as I know
You simply didn't know what paraphonic means. The Poly D is actually amongst the more flexible paraphonic synths as you can chose the oscillator priority. But it obviously will never replace a polyphonic synth. There's a reason why those usually cost a lot more.
You may be better suited with Behringer's Deepmind 12 if you want an affordable, fully analog poly synth. But don't expect it to come anywhere close to the flexibility and versatility of the Poly D when it comes to the capabilities of each single oscillator.
Hi Bernie - thanks for checking out the video. As I said, I do know what paraphonic means, I just didn't know how it was implemented on the Poly D but, more to the point, NONE of the reviews I've seen explain exactly what the paraphonic limitations are, at least not as I've shown here. It's not a matter of expecting a poly - although the name is misleading 😱 - but of being told how it works.😀
No interest in the DM although that also generally seems to get good reviews
I agree that the name 'PolyD' is a bad choice for a paraphonic synth. But the limitations of paraphony apply to all paraphonic synths, not just the Poly D.
But it may be personal preference. To me, a paraphonic mode is nothing more but a nice additional feature on a mono synth. I buy such an instrument to use it mainly monophonic. Being able to play the occasional pad is nice to have. But what makes the Poly D really interesting to me is that 4th oscillator which the original didn't have.
Maybe it would help if you referenced the misleading videos you mentioned. I've seen many YT videos of the Poly D and didn't have the impression they were misleading in terms of the paraphonic mode. Maybe we watched completely different videos. Maybe we simply have different expectations from a paraphonic mono synth.
@@berniem.6965 I simply said I had not seen any reviews which explicitly demonstrated the way paraphony worked on the Poly D, I'm not criticising the Poily D - it's paraphonic and it is what it is. It's great that you and thousands of other s like it
Yes, they really perhaps shouldn't have called "Poly D" and "Para D" wasn't an option...although I wouldn't have cared...can't be worse than "Take 5". I have actually had a couple paraphonics...a Mono/Poly and, my favourite synth of all time, the CS-40m...which I sadly had to part out a couple years ago (although I feel like an organ donor, she lives on! Anyway, ybh when I watched this, I suddenly couldn't remember. I rarely used it. The M/P was so thin sounding with single osc per voice, I just didn't other...it's a huge drone synth though, no need. The Yamaha is duophonic, although that is also paraphonic. Anyway, I sold mine for a couple different reasons; that darned clicking mostly! Yes, some folks are not bothered, others talk about dialing in a bit of attack, yup. Yes, you don't notice it for most patchings, for sure.
But on the quiet, subdued, flutey lead sounds that I loved on my Model D (which I sold-out buy the Poly D!)...it drove me crazy. Even on key release it clicks. Still,vit is a great synth; just not the awesome synth it could have been without that click!
By now, 1000s of happy users don't even notice it, I get it. Both Carr and Shoebridge warn about it, but we all agree, it's still a very fun, and musical synth. But I need authentic Minimoog patches, so I ran out that same day and replaced my Model D. Also, and I know others disagree, but IMO the Model D is just a tiny but crunchier...and when adding resonance, the Poly D loses more bottom end...like a real Moog...but because it sounds so good, I find it a feature in the Model D to NOT lose that bottom. Both are great synths; the Model D is more authentic, by just a hair. True value.
I think of it as a great mono-synth, with benefits!
Hey John - Thanks for your interesting and insightful comment. With this video I simply wanted to demonstrate how it worked rather than just talk about it so people knew what they were getting. Awesome that so many thousands of people love it 👍 I have since considered the Model D but, er, I'm still considering... 😀 A CS-40m - heck! I can appreciate what a loss that must have been. I'm waiting for Mr B to release the long-promised DS-80. Probably appear at the same time as Bladerunner 3 😁
I think the Behringer MonoPoly is better because it has 4 oscillators but with pulse width modulation and dual oscillator sync and cross-modulation
A few people have suggested that it may be a better choice. At least it's an honest mono 😀
@@IanWaugh Paraphony on MonoPoly works exactly the same as Poly D. I'm pretty sure that's what Behringer based it on.
@@thrash2429 Ah, ok, thanks. The MonoPoly seems to have a bit more going on.
I didnt realise it was paraphonic. I have a Creamware Minimax,and although they say it has DCO's , it is 12 voice polyphonic, and sounds very much like a Moog Minimoog to me.Also the interface is more or less the same as the Minimoog.
Hey jonnno - Thanks for watching. Not come across the Minimax before but it looks really cool. Yes, the Poly D name is misleading and Behringer's site says: "Analog 4-Voice Polyphonic Synthesizer with 37 Full-Size Keys, 4 VCOs..." Bit naughty. The reviews, however, DO point out that it's paraphonic but they don't show how that works if you want to play polyphonically.
Yeah, the Creamware Minimax is awesome. It is fully digital which is not a problem but that is why it is able to have proper 12 voice polyphony.
@@notfunny8701 Nice. Alas, no longer in production. Wonder if anyone else will have a stab at the Model D... 😀
There's the other synth called Monopoly by Behringer. I want that but I promised my last synth would be the 2600 by Behringer. I like my 2600 a lot especially for bass
😀 Yes, I have the 2600. Desperately wanted the ARP back in the day but couldn't afford it so this was a no-brainer. Also fancied the original MonoPoly but the Poly D has more features (such as aftertouch and sequencer) so I went with that. The MonoPoly does sound nice.
@@IanWaugh I had the Model D by Behringer and it was my first taste of moog. Then it got traded for Pro1 by Behringer. To now 2600. Behringer made me taste vintage synths and record them. I do want the pro1 back because it’s a nice sounding synth
@@audiolego Yes, the Behringer synths do produce some great sounds. I'm waiting for the Pro-800 and a couple of other clones to appear :-)
@@IanWaugh that and n the PPG
@@audiolego 👍 And DS-80 and OB thing 😀
The demonstration of yours, Ian, made me think that what Uli Behringer did by designing this model was to try to create a rendition of the model D which falls somewhere between the ARP Odyssey and (another the Behringer staff have emulated) the Korg Mono/Poly. That model is itself paraphonic and that it is capable of playing for notes at once but includes a single filter and amplifier for all of them. Sequential and Arteria have themselves come out with their own respective renditions of that architecture.
Please correct me if I’m wrong.
Hi Eric - the biggest misnomer is the name,I don't think 'Para D' would have gone down well 😊 Judging by some comments here, some people thought it was a genuine polyphonic synth. Not sure what other synths you are referring to but I think it's fine as long as people know they are para, not poly, and are happy with the way they work.
Thank you, Ian. I was referring to the Arturo’s Poly Brute and the Sequential Pro 3. They are not exactly identical, but I am convinced they share similar architectures.
@@Shred_The_Weapon Ah. I'm not familiar with either, especially the Pro 3 although I believe the Brute is fully polyphonic if that's what you were referring to.
Thank you again, Ian.
@@Shred_The_Weapon Absolutely no probs - great to chat 😊
Thank you, rule out for me on this one!
Hi Jeffrey - glad you found it helpful. If you want Minimoog-ish sounds there are many alternatives: th-cam.com/video/70k-gG-B5aY/w-d-xo.html
How could it reasonably know which oscillator you want to assign to which key in any given chord?
Hey - thanks for checking this out. It doesn't actually 'know' anything. It's the way it's been designed. It's paraphonic, it is what it is and that's the way it works. Not complaining 😀 just pointing out how it works practically, something the reviews just seem to talk about and not show.
@@IanWaugh Oh me neither! :) I was just literally trying to think of a way myself how that would work.
@@sinistar99 Yeah, I guess if they could build some AI into it, it might be a SuperPara 😀
I see what you mean... if one doesn't know this beforehand it could be quite a bummer. Well, all instruments have their pros and cons, I guess. It's good to know this before I buy mine TOMORROW, hahahahaha Thank you so much for the video!!! 😍
Hey Marce - Yes, as long as you know what you're getting and are happy with it, that's fine 👍
So, I will stay with the Moog's Model D app on my iPad... It sounds fantastic. If someday I want some analogue poly model D experience, I will go with four Behringer's mono Model D in Poly Chain, real polyphony.
That sounds awesome! Would love to know how you get on if you try it 👍
Have you connected your midi controller to it ? its amazing that way... mod wheel and foot pedal work
@@neoaureus Great idea! 👍
So yeh, marketing department just emailed
"You know uli, we cant call it a paraD (parody)"
A missed opportunity... 😄
I actually find my Novation KS4 Multi Timbral synthesizer to be more versatile. Although Multi Tiimbral is different than both Paraphonic and Polyphonic, it does allow a lot of versatility in that it is Midi based and in Performance mode, there is a huge versatility in playing either 1 channel or 4 channels simultaneously and each channel, if you want, can be made up of the 3 oscillators, where you are essentially playing 12 at the same time. And the tuning isn't an issue. You can also have a drum rhythm on one channel, a bass on another, and a synth on a third. Lastly, you can split the keyboard where you can have bass notes on the first octave and solo notes on the last 3 (or 4 if you buy the KS5). Along with a drumline as well. It also has the ability to make piano, organ, clavinet, and other sounds. Add to that it's programmable so you can have presets for hundreds of sounds making live playing a whole lot easier. You can even flip between the 4 channels turning them off and on, essentially having 4 different sounding mono synths without changing the preset. Or combining them in any form you want. And it's about half the price of the Poly D. But it would be considered digital.
Hi Jeffrey - Thanks for your super comment. Yes, multi-timbral instruments are very powerful and versatile. My first was the amazing Yamaha SY77 (th-cam.com/video/E6KeWG1ZnM0/w-d-xo.html) which formed the mainstay of my studio in the 90s and there are several pieces of music on this channel which were recorded solely with the SY. For some reason, multi-timbrality seems to have fallen out of favour recently. Some instruments are 2- 4- or maybe 8-part multi-timbral but full 16-part is rare. Novation produces some great gear 👍
@@IanWaugh Hi Ian. Thaks for the reply. I watched the SY77 video. That was definitely a more difficult unit to keep working baseed on it's older technology with the belt drive and battery. The Novation thankfully relies on neither of those. In fact the Novation is fundamentally two circuit boards. The power supply and a main board. Presets are stored in non-volatile memory. I was fortunate in the USA, about 8 years ago, to stumble upon one being sold in Texas locally for $300 plus a large gig bag (which I haven't used). For quite a while I didn't get to play on it much due to jobs but now that I've been retired for several years, I built a studio adjacent to my house for recording. That's when I became more intimate with synthesizers and the varietals. Several other features in the KS4 that make it flexible is both Sustain and Control pedals and being stereo. The keyboard has a great feel with aftertouch. At the time of purchase I honestly had no idea exactly what it was or who Novation was at all. It was a purchase more rooted in an emotional desire to have a synthesizer again as my long ago sold MiniKorg 700 from the 70s was gone. Mainly I play guitar and keyboard was something I always loved but simply didn't have enough time to master. But now coupled with a computer and Studio One DAW and a Midi keyboard as a second with many Synths and other sounds at my disposal, and the KS4, the skies the limit, with any combination of Mono, Poly, Multi Timbral available that way. There is a fascinating video of this man who combined the use of a Keytar, DAW, FM8 plugin (which converts Yamaha DX7 samples to SY samples (as part of his college course) in an effort to replicate Chick Corea's sound. I have the FM8 plugin as well but there are thousands of samples and I was trying to get the man to simply tell me specifically which ones he used to get his sound but no reply as of yet. But it's ok. I moved on to other things. th-cam.com/video/iHuD5StVWko/w-d-xo.html
Oh also, a neighbor in my community was giving away a broken P48 Yamaha piano. Cost me $120 to replace the power supply board. Works great now. I keep that in my office though where I mostly use it to practice.
@@cranstjs Hi Jeffrey - You've entered a wonderworld of synths 😊 We have so many hard and soft synths to choose from compared to the 80s, it's difficult to keep up with them all. However, you only need a couple and know how to use them to produce great music. I think some people forget that in their pursuit of the latest gear. I have FM8 as part of Native Instruments' Komplete Kontrol but sadly under-used. Sounds like you have a good set-up 👍
@@IanWaugh By the way, I think you were brilliant to point out the marketing tact of Behringer falsely calling the Paraphonic synth Poly. Even though that synth does sound really good. They also sell another synth (I forget which model) that is multi timbral. I'm not even sure if Behringer sells a full Poly synth. Even the perported Poly Deepmind 12 isn't bi-timbral They do make some interesting products that are attractive in the under $1000 market, but I prefer transparency. I will say that although I like the Novation KS4, it did take an inordinate amount of time for me to absorb the rather lengthy user manual and the assortment of Menu's is rather a minefield of challenges. It took me a long time to understand, in Performance mode, dealing with 4 independent and programmable Channels, to realize the complexity of many of the sub-settings to achieve the sounds I wanted. But once I had them I could at least save presets so I wouldn't have to remember them. Generally I've been more of an old school, give me a knob I can turn quickly so I can get on to making music, not learning how to be a programmer. In spite of my 16 years of working as a computer professional at various jobs. I also used to own a Boss 8 track digital recorder. I hated it. Menus and sub menuts, and sub sub menus. Puke! It was like texting on a flip phone. I fiddled with it a few hours, it collected dust for years, and I sold it on Ebay. Good riddance. Studio One as well has been two years of learning all the complexities of that. And I still consider myself only intermediatte in skills with it. A friend of mine moved on much more quickly with an iPhone, GarageBand, a few pieces of hardware. He's done much more successful recording than I have with less to fiddle with.
@@cranstjs Thank you, Jeffrey 😊 I think the Deep Mind is the only Behringer poly although they have been announcing dozens over the last couple of years - and delivering none! I am very much into one-knob-per-function - which immediately rules out most modern synths! Roland is particulalry fond of the nested sub menu so their recent offerings are nowhere on my list which is a shame as they sound great. Guess they just don't have interface designers, just nerdy programmers who don't know a crotchet from a quaver - no offence intended 😊 Knowing your equipment well - as you do - is a good way to go 👍
Thanks for the video, informative. What happens if you select the lowest option? Does that assign the keys low to high within the chord? So more predictable?
Hi Philip - If you mean low note priority, it just means that the lowest note is prioritised rather than the last note. No longer have the Poly D so can't demo it. If you accept it as a para instrument, it's great but, alas, it's not polyphonic in the normal sense.
Hi! Thanks for your insights! So I think I have been watching all Poly D's videos on TH-cam also and I aprreciate that yours says a "negative" thing. We really need people who critiques the product also, otherwise all videos are just ads.
Having said that I found the paraphony on the Poly D pretty neat. I don't play my keys very well and the fact that paraphony introduces some kind of randomnes to my play is amazing to me. It suits me perfectly for my productions.
I just wanted to say this, that paraphony may not be as bad as it looks, it's just another feature other than poliphony :)
Hi Juan - Thank you for your comments. As I said in the video, I wasn't criticising the Poly D for being paraphonic - although Behringer does say it's polyphonic - but was wondering why the reviews don't show the limitations of its paraphonic nature. Watching some of the reviews you could easily think, yes, it's paraphonic but it works like a polyphonic. I just wanted to explicitly demonstrate the issue.
Paraphony is fine if you know what you're getting. Absolutely agree that it can produce some really interesting variations when you play it. Also works to good advantage when sequenced 👍
@@IanWaugh Thanks for the video and your replies Ian, I just subscribed to your channel since you're not another one of those carbon-copy synths reviewers. I'd like to ask you one more question concerning the Poly D, since I'm currently trying to decide whether to buy it or keep my Lead A1: if I got everything right, to play a perfectly fine, standard chord I only need use the same waveform for all of the oscillators, correct? That is, a paraphonic synth like the Poly D, used that way, should bear the same results as using my A1 in poly mode with a single oscillator (although with many less voices!). Thanks in advance!
@@andy5178 Hi Andy - That's very kind, very much appreciated. I no longer have the Poly D so can't test it specifically, but in both 'poly' modes it splits the oscillators between the notes played so if all oscillators are set to the same waveform and pitch then whichever keys you press, they should play the same sound.
We are talking about the Clavia Nord Lead A1? Not sure why you'd want to swap it for a Poly D although you should get a fair amount of change into the bargain 😀
Having said all that, I'm not sure I'd get the Poly D if your sole/main aim is to play polyphonically. As several people have commented, if you embrace its paraphonic nature you can get some interesting results.
Hope this helps.
@@IanWaugh Thanks, therefore it should work fine for pads, as long as I don't expect much sonic variety. Again, I can't but agree with you said: reviewers and Behringer themselves should have explained this much, much better. I, for one, owned an MS-20 Mini, which could become a paraphonic (two "voices", specifically) synth thanks to a patchbay trick: but it didn't behave like the Poly D at all.
I realise it might seem an unwise decision, but the fact is that I don't use synth sounds that much when playing with my band: and the times I need a polysynth are even less. I do compose some electronic and vaporwavish music at home, but I only use softsynths (my favourite one is the MonoPoly, by the way). So I thought, since the classic Moog layout's much easier to use and the sound's perfect for prog rock, why not give the Poly a chance? Besides, I always dreamed of owning a Moog before Behringer released the Model D, and of a keyboardised Model D once it was out!
One thing that many reviewers fail to show is that the A1, whilst being arguably one of the best VA ever made, it's far from user friendly when you need to stack OSCs. The only way to use more than two (and even then, it's just one main plus a predefined second, over which you don't have much control nor choice) is to use the perf mode and stack up to four programs: but that also means working on four programs at once with one set of knobs and a far from analogue-inspired layout. Basically, aside from the many patches I downloaded, I find myself playing most of the time with a single oscillator or two at most. For what I play live (mostly rock), I feel like an amazing monosynth which can also act as a limited pad/string machine would be ideal. For everything else, I rely on my Electro 6.
@@andy5178 Hi Andy - yes, it should sound good and it IS easy to use 😀 Gear is quite individual so if that will suit you better, that's great 👍 I don't know much about the Nords. They seem to get good reviews but they've never really been on my radar for some reason. Anyway, have fun and enjoy your music 🎼
I have only just started to enter the world of synthesizers, I received my behringer poly d last week, I would like to know how we do to connect it to our daw? Knowing that I have a Focusrite 2i2, I have to buy it to wired?
Thanks your for alls you do
Hey - Thanks for checking this out and welcome to the wonderful world of synthesisers 😀Connect the Focusrite to your computer via USB. You may have to install dedicated srivers which may come with the unit or which you may have to download from the Focusrite site. This should appear in your DAW as an audio In/Out. Connect the Poly D Output to the Focusrite and the Focusrite Output to speakers or use the headphone Out. Good luck and have fun!👍
@@IanWaugh Thank you very much :) know that since yesterday I watched your videos enormously and I greatly appreciate the content, I even started reading the roland pdf on the synthesis! I have a very quick question, you told me to connect the output of the poly d to the focusrite, but with which cable? a ts, very or just a 6.35 balanced jack, thanks you and again sorry to waste your time with this question, I am in such a hurry to be able to record this magnificent Poly D
@@1eidji652 Glad you're enjoying the videos and finding them helpful. The Roland books will teach you about synthesis but the Poly D has much simpler routing and is not as flexible as a modular system as the booklets describe.
I no longer have the Poly D so not sure if it uses balanced or unbalanced cables. All my synths except one are unbalanced and I use unbalanced cables to connect them to a line mixer without problems. Technically, I think either should work but there's no such thing as 100% certainty with audio connections 😀 Personally I'd try unbalanced first.
@Rhizosphere Thank you.
I guess that's why they put a sequencer on it.
Hey John - Well, I think they had one lying around... 😊
Hi! I use the Poly D for quite some time now - and I am quite annoyed by the random paraphonic notes...do you know if the Moog Matriarch does the same? Or is there a way that the oscillators are allocated like they should be (low note goes to lowest oscillator and so on)? Thanks in advance!!
Hi - Sorry but I don't know how the Matriarch's paroophony works. You can probably find out by downloading the manual. I don't think the Poly D can assign oscillators as you describe. The app will show the options.
Thanks - I bought the Matriarch anyway...AND I LOVE IT!! @@IanWaugh
@@CaptainSweat Awesome! It's a super synth 👍
Thank
You're welcime 👍
5:20!!! I figured this would be the method to play chords on my Matriarch. The Poly D looks cool too, I must admit
Hi - I don't have a Matriarch, just a more humble - but still awesome 😁 -Grandmother. Paraphony can be implemented differently buy different manufacturers on different instruments so I don't know for sure but I suspect it will work 😁 Yeah, the Poly D is cool as long as you realise it's not a poly 😀 and are happy with the way its paraphony works.
I think those who criticize the paraphony of the Poly D are looking down the wrong end of the telescope. Don't think of it as a cut-down polyphonic synthesizer... Think of it as a juiced up Minimoog. I was fully aware that the Poly D was paraphonic, and I bought it anyway. Honestly, I would have bought it if it were strictly monophonic. I have other keyboards to play that ARE fully polyphonic, but I don't have a Minimoog, and I probably never will, so the Poly D is as close as I'm ever going to get to having that tonal/tactile experience. Also, I've never owned an analog synth. I started playing keys when the DX7 was king, and frankly, all the knobs and switches on analog synthesizers always intimidated me (and so did the prices). I thought the Poly D would be a good way to finally man up and learn how to work an analog synth. Something that software synths and VSTs never inspired in me.
Hey - Thanks for your super comment. Yes, I agree 😊 However, you obviously know how para works but many would-be buyers don't as is evident by some comments here coupled with Behringer's misleading name and the fact that paraphony has never been demonstrated in any review I've seen up to making this video. So as long as you know what you're getting, everything's fine 😊 I started a little while before the DX and my main keyboard for a long time was the Yamaha SY-77. However, I do now much prefer hands-on controls as it makes it easier to edit and manupulate sounds. Agree about most software, though 😱
@@IanWaugh Indeed, Behringer could have done a better job of making it clear that it's paraphonic. Not calling it "Poly D" would have been a good start, but I'd be hard pressed to come up with a name that communicates that its more than a monophonic synth. "Para D", as some have suggested would not be my first choice from a marketing standpoint. It sounds like "Parody". Not a great name for something that's a copy of something else. 😃
Maybe they should have called it the Model D+ or something... I dunno.
@@Luthiart Model D+ sounds good, and not misleading 😊
Great video Ian. You are the 1% that bought this keyboard for Paraphonic needs. The other 99% of the population bought this synth because we don't have 5000 dollars to get a Mini Moog or a expensive Moog at 2000 to play bass leads. This 600 dollar Poly D does all that and more. Its like getting a perfect cheeseburger and adding condiments like bacon or Jalapenos. Some of us like bacon and some of us don't so we can just strip that off the burger (leave these settings off or alone) With all this being said I am interested in which synth you are using just for soaring leads and which synth you are using for bass lines. Also which synth did you ultimately go for to find the Paraphonic sounds you were looking for?
Hi - Well, not sure if I explained it clearly but I wasn't specifically after a para synth. With the Poly D I wanted a cheap Minimoog 😊 and although I could ignore the para bits, it'd be like buying a car with 5 gears and only using 3. Anyway, the video was just to point out how para works on the Poly D - not seen it clearly explained in any 'review' videos.
@@IanWaugh but you said you returned it? I am ultimately curious as to why you returned the synth if you did buy it as a cheap minimoog sound?
@@epluribusfunk514 I explained that in the video 😊
Hey Ian, thanks for putting this video together! But a lowcut filter on that "room/voice mic" would really help your audio quality... For instance, when you start playing at around 2:10, something, I guess it's actually your hand/fingers hitting the keys, creates a huge amount of rumble. Cheers - Hans 😅
Hey Hans - Thanks for checking this out and your comments. Yes, a lot could be done to improve most aspects of my videos 😀 but, alas, I am limited by equipment and visual problems so I do the best I can. I think that section was recorded on an old iPhone 😀 I hope it didn't distract too much from the content.
@@IanWaugh The massive low end was actually unbearable on my system. I just inserted a low cut filter across the master and enjoyed it then. 😀
@@wackerburgGlad you got it sorted, Hans 👍
Paraphony was the one factor that steered me away from the Matriarch.
I've only just discovered that it's para not mono. I have the Grandmother and have thought about 'upgrading' but, as you say, the para has put me off. Now double-checking every synth I take a fancy to 😀
I wonder what your take is on the new east beast and west pest synthesizers
Hey Robert - They look cool. I haven't had hands-on so can't say much about them although there are lots of reviews on the net. If you get one, let's know what you think 👍
thanks a lot for explaining this, this was the synth I wanted but this is definitely a major issue as I’m selling for a polyphonic companion to a Grandmother. I still think i’d definitely the be$t alternative to the model D.
Hi Leo - Glad you found it helpful. It's fine at what it does if you can work with it but there are other polys around the same price.
Wouldve really appreciated a demonstration of the proposed solution @5:22.
Hey Adam - Thanks for watching. Yes, sorry, I guess I could have tuned the oscillators etc., but it can take a little while and that's essentially what you need to do, as described. It's a big faff if you want to play polyphonically
@@IanWaugh it may be, but thats kind of the point of watching vids like these. Informing those that sont have access to a demo to try and better understand what we're in for. I do appreciate u pointing out some of the less obvious cons. Always want to see the flip side of the coin tho.
@@adamkrasneski3679 Point definitely taken, Adam. However, when I made the video, my aim was to show what other reviewers had not shown rather than explain how to make a para synth play polyphonically 😀 If you want true polyphony, this is not for you. If you're happy with a para synth that can fudge polyphony then maybe 😁
I'd see that guy at a coffee shop and I'd know he was a musician for sure.
What guy's that, Penny?
Very helpful. Does it occur on any poly synth like Moog Matriarch?
Hey Itzhak - Thank you. Paraphony can be implemented in slightly different ways on different synths. The main point is that all voices share some part of the circuit so they might all share the filter or the envelope or both. The Matriarch is not a poly, it's a para 😊 so will have some polyphonic ;limitations but I haven't tried it so can't say exactly how it operates.
@@IanWaugh Do we have to turn all four OSCs to the same pitch to get a non-priority sound? Or maybe two of them?
@@ItzhakWoolf Essentially, to play a para polyphonically, all the Oscs need to be the same. So if you want to play 4 notes, you'd need to set all 4 Oscs the same, just setting 2 wouldn't do it.
Yes , it should be named as Para D . And , when you play in a '' poly '' mode , only one osc is by the 4 notes . Beside , will be nice if Behringer offer some dif. version , beside that , with real poly ...
Thanks for your comment. Yes indeed, although a lot of users are very happy with it. In a recent comment here Carlos Luíz said he has 3 PolyDs in order to get polyphony! Pure Ambient Drone has just made a video about the lack of poly synths from Behringer. I don't see a real polyphonic Poly D coming along, though...
Whay about the different key priority modes ? You should have shown how they compare.
I heared the the Beh model D sound more true to orig ?
Thanks for watching - Yes, I guess I could have done - that would have been even MORE stuff the reviews don't tell you 😀 It was just intended to be a heads-up for anyone who wondered how paraphony worked on the Poly D.
Yes, the Model D is supposed to be great but I have no personal experience there.
Le gars il a découvert l'eau tiède en 2023...
According to Google that means: The guy discovered lukewarm water in 2023... 🤣
I agree,,, it frustrated me too.. still got it but,,, I go back to other Synths... Btw... by your accent,,, ye from my part of the UK 👍
Probably 😊 It's fine as long as you know how it works and you're happy with it 😊
@@IanWaugh Yep, its still played. handy for certain timbre's ☺
@@PerAnkh418 Yep, interesting with the sequencer
The name is the main thing I dislike about this synth. It may be the best version of an analogue Model D *monosynth* out there (extra osc etc).. but it causes so much confusion with people thinking it's a true fully articulated polyphonic, rather than paraphonic-polyphonic (let's shorten to paraphonic like anyone sensible does)
I'll probably pick one up used in protest and get a "Para D" badge for it
The other reason the name annoys me is.. people have been asking for a true polysynth made out of Model D voices for years.. Behringer had a great opportunity to actually do that! Para D could have been this.. then Poly D could have been the full 8 voice poly
Ha! Ha! I'd love to see a photo of that 😁 I guess you could save money and photoshop it. Someone probably has. Yes, indeed, it could cause confusion and, yes, Behringer did miss an opportunity. But thousands of people love it and that's great, too!
DUDE... What are you thinking?? This is a COPY of a MINIMOOG. It's a COPY, with an arp, and a sequencer, and an extra oscillator. It's a COPY PLUS. That's all it is. You're nattering on because it's not a Sequential, basically. Hello? It's SEVEN HUNDRED DOLLARS, and it's a frighteningly close replica of the Minimoog, which is currently reissued in 2022 at a price of FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS. Do you have issues with the Minimoog as well? I just don't understand what you wanted from this. Did it occur to you that, by making the oscillators tunable to an octave plus or minus, that might have meant sacrificing the ability to sound almost exactly like a Minimoog? ::::sigh:::: I just feel like... you're really missing the point here.
It might help if you watch the video - or re-watch it. I say a couple of times that I'm not criticising the Poly D. I don't know how much clearer I can be. I made the video to *demonstrate* how paraphony works on the Poly D. Other reviewers talk the talk but don't actually SHOW how it works. That's it. But it just didn't suit me. Thousands of Poly D owners are very happy with it and that's great. I don't have a problem with anyone liking or buying any synth 😊 We're all here to make music 👍
I was like: "so...? .... so? .... so what?" until it got to the "I've never owned a paraphonic synthesiser before". Ah OK, that makes sense now. Not the best paraphonic synth to get as your first synth. Makes total sense now.
Hi - Wasn't particularly looking to get a para as such, just a cheap Minimoog 😀 But essentially made the video because I hadn't seen a review that actually SHOWS and demonstrates how paraphony works on the Poly D. I think people should know so they can make an informed decision 👍
@@IanWaugh Yeah, for sure. There are written descriptions, but these days people just don't read any more. Also, they are a little dry and technical so for anyone just getting into hardware synths a video that breaks it all down is definitely better, kudos for doing that. And PolyD is quirky in more ways than one, it's definitely not for everyone.
@@telumatramenti7250 Thank you. Just trying to help 😁
I'm not sure you understood what a paraphonic synth was when you bought this.
Hey David - Well, I did say I know what paraphony is, that different manufacturers implement it in different ways but I wasn't sure how it was implemented on the Poly D as no one had bothered to actually demonstrate it before 😊So not sure where your confusion lies...
@@IanWaugh just some of the comments you made about what you wanted to do with the paraphony - things like having oscillators tuned to different pitches or unison slightly detuned. (6.00) That's not how paraphony works you can only do that with a true polyphonic synth that has multiple oscillators assigned to each note. There are one or two paraphonic synths that will allow you to do something like assign two oscillators to one voice but that kind of halfway house halves the paraphony so you still wouldn't be able to play your three note chord example. Its not a terribly common way of doing things but the Vermona Perfourmer has such a two oscillator per note mode. Much more expensive synth too of course.
@@DaveBessell I see the confusion. I didn't say I was expecting to do that on the Poly D, I was simply saying if you have 4 Oscillators that's the sort of thing you might expect. Maybe I didn't phrase it well but I was having a little go at B calling it Poly when it;s really a Para 😊
@@IanWaugh well B could hardly have called it the 'Para D' 😂
@@DaveBessell Yes, but some folks do 😄
Don't know just seems like the classic uninformed consumer.
You're pretty old to be into synths and not have encountered this before, this is definitely not the first synth made like this.
Funny thing is they could have made changes to make it a normal polyphonic design but that would have affected it in ways that would have had a true negative affect on what they were trying to do.
I would guess you dislike the MonoPoly in both forms (Korg or Behringer)?
🤣 Well, that's pretty rude. It sounds like you haven't watched the video or understood why I made it. I didn't realise there was an age limit on liking synths. Have you told Rick Wakeman and Jean-Michel Jarre ? 😊
ThanX!
You're welcome 😀
Behringer should never have called it the "Poly" D. What a misnomer. That they threw a Juno-style chorus on there shows they were insecure with the paraphony's 1-osc-per-voice and felt the need to give the option to beefen that up. While not a true polyphonic Model D, it's nonetheless amazing to essentially get a Minimoog (if you use it in mono mode) for this price. If you really want a true polyphonic minimoog, I think you can daisy chain Behringer's "Model D" units to accomplish that.
Thank you for your comment. Yes, they took a bit of a liberty with the name 😮 But lots of people love it which is fine. I just wanted to demonstrate how the para modes work in practise. Many people say they prefer the Model D although some say the controls are a little cramped. Lots of choice 👍😀
@@IanWaugh Yes, the Model D is very small! I was surprised when I saw it in person. Seeing pictures I hadn't realizes it has micro-sized knobs.
Thanks for the video. It's a good demonstration of this key shortcoming.
@@Thoracius Thank you very much. I often get confused about the REAL size of gear. Eurorack modules, for example, look MASSIVE in videos 😀
How in the world would you not know this?? The Behringer videos go over this.
Hey Lincoln - Thanks for checking this out. I'm simply saying I have not seen any videos demonstrating the issues of paraphony. They talk but don't show.
@@IanWaugh gotcha! Like you said it's still an awesome synth!!
@@lincolnmmitchell Indeed, and good VFM😀
TX I am not going to get this one then because I want a POLY.
Hi - Yes, it's definitely not a poly 😊
At last! Someone that understands me! I didn't knew this when I bought it... I kinda hate this too... I didn't knew this "paraphonic" thing before purchasing it and is good that you point it out because yes... As you said, NO ONE speaks about this when they review it.
Hi - Thank you. Yes, it can be misleading unless you dig into it, especially with 'Poly' in the name.
Always look at the spec sheet before pulling the trigger
@@SuchaDoofus Hi Oliver - sound advice! But I think most people rely on YT reviews - at least I do 😁 But none actually SHOWED how paraphony worked on this one so hoping this video helps.
Sooo ... it should be called the para d 😐
😀 I'm sure that's a name they thought of but rejected for some inexplicable reason 😀
It should've been named "Para D" not Poly D
That would have gone down well 😊
Wait for the Behringer ub-xa..
Hi Antonio - Yes, we're all waiting for a lot of Behringer stuff 😀 I'm very interested in that and the DS-80.
Luckily there are more qualified reviewers on YT.
Hey Rayy - I totally agree. Although this wasn't a review, I was simply showing how paraphony works on the Poly D. Other reviews tell you but don't show you 😁😁
loopop mentions this paraphonic behavior in his review, and this is the most popular review on youtube for this synth, you didn't need to watch every video mate, just pay attention *wink-wink*
It is! But, like other reviewers, he TELLS you what is is but doesn't show or demonstrate it 😉😉
This is why I still held out not buying one 2021. You can get the plugin that can play the mini in poly mode Arturia makes one.
Hey Dave - Thanks for watching 👍 Yes, there are software alternatives for most hardware synths but there's something about hands-on knob-twiddling that many people find good for creativity. Including me 🤣 However, most folks can't afford all the hardware gear and, as you say, software can do much more than hardware. I have the MiniMoog in Arturia's V Collection and it's great! Starsky Carr has done several video comparisons on the Mini - here's just one you might find interesting: th-cam.com/video/S1h07ws--CM/w-d-xo.html
Ugh..... Okay, professor.
Well, Cliff, no one else has demonstrated it 😊
I am looking for a cheap synthesizers. Whether poly or Holy. I just want to have fun. to become happy . Which you can recommend me, you have so many .What is good for fun danke Mr.
Hey Mr - Personally, for fun I like one-knob-per-function synths as they are easy to use. But synths which have menues (typically digital) often have super presets. For cheapness, it's difficult to beat Behringer. Difficult to suggest synths to look at with out more information. There are hundreds avaiable. Check out synth reviews - you'll get loads of ideas.
@@IanWaugh DANKE behringer deepmind 12 ORDE behringer poly I think one of them will bring poly D is easier I think
@@mr.engizmemo9997 The Deep Mind is more polyphonic 😁 but the MonoPoly and Poly D will be easier to use as they don't have a LCD. Some users have said the DM is a bit menu-divy but I haven't tried any of these synths so can't comment.
Feels like you were actually looking for a 4 Osc 4 note poly ... whereas in poly mode this is effectively a single Osc 4 note unit ... for the money and it’s sound there really is nothing close
Hey Paul - Thanks for your comment. I wasn't looking for anything specific, I was just wondering how paraphony worked on the Poly D as no review seems to demonstrate it in the way I have - hence the video. 😁 If you're happy with the way it works it's a great VFM synth and thousands of people love it 👍
@@IanWaugh I think for a poly mode of what you are looking for you need 16 osc .. something like an analog 4 style .. para is just scattering the osc around the keys you press ..
@@synkuk Well, Paul, I wasn't particularly looking for a poly. It does say Poly in the name which is a bit naughty but I knew it was para, just not sure how it had been implemented as no one had demonstrated it 😀 Paraphonic seems to be interpreted slightly differently by different companies. I think we all agree on 'polyphonic' - apart from Behringer 😀 Paraphonic can be ok but this just didn't suit the way I work.
These are all monophonic synths which can be thought of as expanded mono with creative workflows...but it is NOTa polysynth. I don't buy analog polysynths, digital are far better and full of notes you can play, like my Roland Gaia, 64 notes of poly and I use every one. For chords with overlapping long envelopes you need lots of voices. I do want this synth, for the creative voices, four beautiful musical oscillators and all analog sounds for the sweetest leads you can imagine.
Hey - Thanks for checking this out. I'm not an analogue purist, for me it's the sound at the end of the day that matters so tend to agree 😀 If you like digital, there are lots of software clones you might find interesting. Starsky Carr has a few videos comparing them all and I'm sure he probably compares this with the original, too 👍
@@IanWaugh The new Roland Boutique JD-08 is next for digital, a small version but more powerful than the JD800 from the early 90s.
@@WildernessMusic_GentleSerene Yes, I saw that. Very interested in the Boutique version. Spoke to Roland and they have the only two models in the UK at the moment!. Most retailers are quoting a January delivery. Not sure whether to jump on the pre-order wagon or wait until they actually arrive - and probably immediately sell out! 😀
@@IanWaugh I missed the Juno when it first came out, but the JX--08 may be a better synth with 2 oscillators, 24 voices, a sine wave LFO, two envelopes and the triple chorus effects.
@@WildernessMusic_GentleSerene I guess it depends what you're looking for. I will look for more info before making a decision 😁
There seems to be two types of synth enthusiasts. The first type wants everything vintage as it was and they enjoy limitations in a way because it makes things simple and straight forward.
The other type hates limitations with creativity and wants to push the limits. I'm similar to you and limitations like this just frustrate me. It was a different story back in the 70's when these synths were considered the most advanced for the time. Now in 2023 it just feels like limiting capabilities on purpose. They do sound great for what they do but ultimately they have limits on what type of sounds you can make with them. Prophet 5 with all it's glory is limited to 5 voices and sequential sells expansion cards to make it 10. That makes little sense to me for a new remake.
Hi - That's an interesting division. Yes, I also find it strange that re-issues and clones often do little to add to the original features. I guessit takes all sorts... 😊
Should have been named Para D. Don't know why they call it poly when it isn't. Behringer being dirty as usual.
Hey Ben - Thanks for your comment. I think ParaD might have been a bit too close to the truth even for Behringer 😊
:)