A polyphonic synthesizer in 1974???
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 ก.พ. 2025
- What if I told you that there was an instrument capable of giving the polyphonic synthesizer sounds that were sought after 1968, but historically weren't provided in a consumer sense until 1975?
Have a listen and see if you are familiar with this common instrument...
In this video, all synthesizer sounds were generated by a readily-available polyphonic instrument from 1974.
This video was funded by the Patreon supporters of Automatic Gainsay. Support the creation of this video and all of the Automatic Gainsay videos that have helped you by becoming an Automatic Gainsay supporter on Patreon!
/ automaticgainsay
The odd thing is that people were not plugging RMI electric pianos into the external inputs in various synthesizers. The rmi's were used professionally by people like wakeman, Emerson and Banks quite a lot in their early music. They had organ and harpsichord tones and a sustained setting which would work as the sustain in ADSRs.
Immediately checks to see if Marc is playing with an organ.
I'm just so glad the hair is back. ;) Cheers!
[thinks for a while, scratches head, types a suggestion, scratches head, deletes it, listens again, types another suggestion, glares at screen, listens again, deletes it, lather rinse repeat, stalks away hearing Doty cackling in his ears and muttering to himself about the sanity of having Marc as a close friend]
Ha ha, of all people, I knew this would drive you crazy. :D
Jean-Michel Jarre had one of these set up in his studio when we visited him. So perhaps he was an early user?
Probably! I mean, I would think that a number of people at his level would have jumped on it, at least as a novelty! Perhaps you could ask some people the next time you guys are interviewing! :)
Possibly one of the more elaborate Yamaha electone organs. Some of them, particularly the EX-42, had VERY interesting sound generation capabilities. I doubt that this is an EX-42. They're super-rare nowadays and terrifyingly expensive.
Even tho this came up in a search for the very instrument, I would've probably recognised the sound after a while. We've had ours since '78. What sold us on it at the time was the built-in drum machine (a licensed Minipops variant, I believe), which is not heard here.
Sadly, it's been neglected over the years and needs some work. Probably a project for me when I finally retire...
As with many of its contemporaries, once you strip these instruments from their original cheesy 70s context and targeted (consumer) audience, you realise they still have a lot of modern appeal.
My first thought was the amazing Hammond Novachord that you've obviously covered in another video Marc but of course they were at the time and especially in 1974 to now extremely rare! For those who aren't familiar: only about 1,000 were made between 1939 and 1942, weighted a gut busting 500 pounds, and cost an equivalent of over $38,000 in todays dollars!
I always assume that people know my categorizations because I've been screaming them for so many years. :D
Of course, there have been "polyphonic synthesizers" going all the way back to the Telharmonium. Bode's 1937 Warbo is another fantastic example.
The Novachord has a special place in my heart because I owned one from 2000 to 2008, and it was absolutely WONDERFUL. I have two songs and a couple of pieces from a theatrical score where I used it. And yes, as a person who moved that Novachord several times, I can assure you that carrying it is not any fun at all. :D
Anyway, back to categorization: Bob's work in 1964 sort of crystalized the format of synthesis, not only in the chain of functions that we typically use, but also the employment of voltage control. While there were some voltage control elements in previous electronic instruments, Bob's application was different and really, really stuck (as you know, John). So, when I talk to the public about the "modern synthesizer," what I'm really talking about is a synthesizer in the context of everything that has happened since 1964. So, when I'm talking about "polyphonic synthesizers not existing before 1975," I'm just talking about polyphonic synthesizers from the modern perspective.
Thanks for your comment, John! I hope things are good with you!
@@automaticgainsay Thanks Marc! I'm alive, reasonably healthy, and live in decent comfort so I shouldn't complain . . . but dude . . .according to my teenage self I was supposed to be a mega rich and famous musician and inventor by now, what gives?! 😫😅 I hope all is well with you too, good sir! 🤗
I'm kinda glad more musicians weren't aware of this, because it meant they kept using the Mellotron a little bit longer :)
2:14 I just had one of those this-sounds-like-something-I-know moments and had to hum that progression back to myself several times, then I hit on it: Asia’s “Sole Survivor.” Was that intentional? Gonna have to spin this album today. 👍🏻
I've no idea what it is but I can sort of hear why it wasn't taken up. Mind you it could probably be made to sound passable with some tape echo. Perhaps the soggy filter envelopes rendered it unplayable in a serious context?
While there is absolutely no doubt that it, compared to the instruments that came after it, simply isn't great at all, you have to think of it in the context of the time. In 1974, there was nothing to compare it to. While we, after decades of fantastic analog polysynths know what a great polysynth sounds like (and this isn't it), these sounds would have been totally useful, totally exciting, and even groundbreaking, had they been used in popular music in 1974.
No idea, but I remember faking it by running an ARP String Ensemble into the filter of an ARP Odyssey. That was the closest we got in 1974.
Not too different from what is happening here, to be honest...
@@automaticgainsay So is it a Solina String Synth per chance?
@@nativeVS I've never played one.
It’s like a scab that Marc can’t help but pick at.
I looked up the chipset on the trace I was tripping on and up came a Baldwin Fun Machine!
Whatever it is, it sounds like it might be the same synth used for that 1970's PBS network identification prompt.
This is the Baldwin, right?
I’m sure I have no idea what you could be talking about, Mr. Ball! :D
@@automaticgainsay whatever it is, it sure sounds like it would be a *fun machine*? to own. oh I can just hear the *fanfare*? of my family as I perform for them in uh our *deluxe*? apartment in the sky
@@PrismaticSpray I am with you and Alex on this after looking that up it sounds exactly like what was being played.
Paia Oz?
I had a Baldwin organ when I was younger. It had some sounds that sounded similar to these. Especially example 2. Definitely miss the thing. I’m guessing this is something similar but not the exact model I had.
Well after auh little research & readin' all the comments I'm still stumped u never cease to amaze luv the hairdo Doty as usual udahman dude
I knew Keith used prototype Polymoog on Brain Salad Surgery.
Is it the Yamaha YC series combo organs? Like the Yamaha YC-45? Listen to Crazy Horses by the Osmonds if you want to hear the pitch ribbon wailing. It is awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Here is a link to Crazy Horses, awesome! th-cam.com/video/iXcj8dFOd1E/w-d-xo.html
Wurlitzer had a whole line of "electronic" organs starting in the very early 70s that were fully polyphonic and analog. Many included a cheesy little "Orbit III" monophonic synth for goofy sounds. They also included cheesy analog rhythm sections such as heard on this track.
My brother had a full sized, 2 rank, Wurlitzer analog theater organ replete with the Orbit III and a built in Leslie; I believe it was from '76 or thereabouts. It was a nightmare to keep in good working order, was FULL of sound generator cards. Though maybe you can't count this because it was additive, not subtractive polyphonic synthesis.
The thing about the Orbit III and some others... that was a monophonic synth! Now, if it would have allowed the organ to go through the synth's filter, that might be closer to what we're hearing here...
@@automaticgainsay Right, the Orbit III was monophonic, but the organ itself was polyphonic and analog. I contend that those early analog organs should qualify. They were polyphonic, multi oscillator, additive synths.
I don't now, but doing a little research I know I want a Gleeman Pentaphonic Clear, what a cool synth
On a demo of an analog poly synth on another channel, I commented: It sounds like an organ to me.
I guess i won't get any flak here 😆
It’s a Martin D-28. Yeah, that’s the ticket!
I'm getting octave-divider w/single filter vibes from the sound, but I could be wrong.
Is this going to turn out to be some sort of electronic accordion or something? :)
Ok. I see the answers below. I was really hoping for an electronic accordion.
The Baldwin Fun Machine 🤔
:::laughs over-loudly::: Ha ha ha, that's... um... crazy, Richard! Where ever did you get such a preposterous idea? :::looks around nervously:::
@@automaticgainsay well well well
Baldwin Fun Machine? I had one a long time ago and I think I remember it sounded a lot like this.
OK, i have no Idea what it could be. Just a few Notes.
- Early Oberheim 74 SEM Racks could be played polyphonicly with a key assigner Panel, but it didn't have a Ladder Filter.
- If it was a divide down Stringachine or Organ it had to have a Filter, what could it be? Something like a Farfisa Syntorchestra but with the Filter on the Poly Section, a bit like a Casio MT-400V but way earlier. I'm confused!
Forgive my obsessive specificity, but while many modular things could be played polyphonically theoretically, the term "polyphony" in regard to synthesizers is related to realtime control with what is typically a keyboard, and usually within a instrument (as opposed to modular system) context. It is within that construct that I use this terminology. Of course, there are other important distinctions I'm kind of fudging on for the purpose of this video concept, but you can yell at me when I do the reveal video, soon! :D
@@automaticgainsay Now i'm even more curious. But the one thing i can tell you is that the timing of your playing is suspiciously sloppy (Thinking about Follower Circuits like in Wahs).
It sounds nice though 😉
@@fratariensis ha ha, totally!
I’ll post the weirdest guess. This was created by an Electrocomp 100 or 101 or possibly an EML 200 using a Poly-Box for multiple voicing. Please let me know what I’ve won. LOL
Crumar of some kind... The Brass section on my Multiman S (Orchestrator - I think it was called in the US) sounded a lot like that
thought about crumar too
Didn't RMI's Keyboard Computer come out in 1974? Although from the sound examples I'd be expecting it to be something different; at what point did E-Mu develop their polyphonic keyboard again?
Rossum's polyphonic controller came out, but if we're talking polyphonic controllers, Buchla had that beat in 1971, even if it was kind of a weird polyphonic function. :D
@@automaticgainsay But with the Polyphonic Keyboard you could build a decent Polyphonic Modular, as used by Zappa (6 voices I believe) until it got replaced by the CS-80 and Prophet 5.
Also, considering the whole system could be wired up at the back it didn't have the hassle of any other polyphonic modular (ok, it must have still been a right pain to change sounds, but not much more painful than on an Oberheim).
That was my guess as well... RMI Keyboard Computer. When he says it was "all over" the RMI was technically the innards of an Allen Organ, correct? The first one... wasn't it 1974? And then came the RMI KII w/ the punch cards in like 1975-ish??
@@nativeVS I have thought a lot about this for many years, and the truth was that all modulars with the right type of modules could produce multiple notes simultaneously, it's just that there wasn't a controller that really allowed it to happen in the way that users expected... and that way was simply playing traditional chords. Traditional chords were not at all what most modular owners wanted or were doing up until the early 1970s. Certainly, had something like the E-Mu controller existed earlier, we would have heard more polyphonic outcomes from modulars, but when popular music-oriented synthesizers started being made in the early 70s, popular music makers were looking for an all-in-one synthesizer instrument.
Which is not to disagree at all, but rather to explain why I focus more on non-modular polyphony! :D
@@automaticgainsay Ok, well then. Did the ARP Omni come out in 1974 or was it 1975?
Couldn't the Solina String Synthesizer also take the Solina divide down voices into the Synth section for paraphonic playing? That must have definitely been around 1974.
Sounds like an early Roland or Hillwood string synth. I seem to remember the early ones had the ladder filter but no chrous IC. Maybe that big funky Multivox 3000 but I thought that was later.
I’d say either a Baldwin Fun Machine or a Wurlitzer with the Orbit III.
Maybe if there was a model that allowed you to run the organ through the Orbit’s filter.
I haven’t seen a video about the White Elephant in a while but I think that’s a simple layering affair.
I gotta go back to the Fun Machine… that’s my best guess. Unless there’s an Italian organ manufacturer that copied the ladder filter that I don’t know about.
Funny, I think it sounds fucking fabulous!
those constantly shifting circuit diagrams are PAIN ;w;
Awesome video nevertheless :3
They are a bit passive-aggressive. I'm sorry. :D
We should all stop playing with our organs ... no, did I say that out loud? Actually, not really outrage - but more an interesting tid bit ... Your video comes out talking about a ladder filter ... today I was playing with this new DSP56300 emulator (sorry, it's digital) - but we wanted to hear what it was like going through analog ladder filters o_0 --> do I also get to leave you all in suspense?
I’d guess something by Eminent.
Perhaps running an organ (via gating/Triggering) through a Minimoog's filter for polyphony?
I'll go for the Yamaha SY22, oops I mean SY1: similar sounds from 1974
Except monophonic
Schematics remind me of the Conn electric band
Spoiler alert: Alan Parson's mystery, homemade, top secret synth that has no photographic record but supposedly was used on his records. I win.
I wish that were this!
my face when Baldwin fun machine
How pedantic do ya want to get? Tonewheel organs have been around since at least the 1930s and are additive polyphonic analog synthesizers.
Clif, I’m as pedantic as you’d want to get. In this, I’m employing the modern paradigm of what sounds are expected from modern polyphonic synths. Of course, devices that fit a definition of “synthesizer” go back to Bode’s 1937 Warbo. And while “tonewheel” instruments are basically repurposed additive synths, that technology goes back to 1897.
For more, you might check out my History of Polyphony series. :)
Maybe a Baldwin. Maybe a Kimball or a Lowrey.
I am a mono synth guy so I really don't care ... but I had to drop in and say nice things about your hair! 👍
Example 5 sounds like a very typical sound used for many vocoded singing parts....
The examples make me think the envelope control was very limited - perhaps A/D with a predefined sustain? Given the examples also, it sounds also that if you could adjust resonance at all it was limited in how high you could take it. I think otherwise you would have shown that off.... Lastly, I didn't hear you play anything too high or low, so makes me think the keyboard range was limited and not adjustable for different octaves. Doesn't bring me any closer at the moment... (That said I did do a google for stuff, so my guess would be the Electone GX-707 and the reason most musicians in bands didn't get it as it required people to sit AND it was expensive.)
Paul, you have touched on some truths about this instrument!
@@automaticgainsay I retract my Electone comment, keyboard range was very long and I suspect the synth part keyboard was like the Wurlitzer Orbit III, monophonic. I think that is roughly the keyboard's range though, about 25-44 keys max. I've watched enough of your vids that if there was some bass to show off you would have... :-)
I'm guessing something Italian made ... there seems to a whole load of oddities put there that could have been hugely successful but never seemed to.
I want to say Arp Omni or Crumar Brassman
It's synth section of some electronic organ.
You bastard !
Tell usssss
VACO Orchestron
Even if I’m wrong I want one.
God Bless.
Hammond 102200 & Auto-Vari 64 DM? dude
Maybe an e-organ? Electone aka Yamaha for example had released the GX-707 in 1973, which becomes the GX-1 in 1975. The GX-707 has 2-pole LPFs and HPFs (as ladder filters?). Here is a sound example of the GX-1/GX-707: th-cam.com/video/Fb9jZnfB4YY/w-d-xo.html
Thanks for this!
Greetings! GX filters are diode based, unlike Moog's transistors filter.
Did someone already mention Yamaha SY-1 ? dude
Wasnt polyphonic.
Is that a TOPS? Thomas Organ PolySynth?
What if I tell you that also in 1974 polyphonic digital romplers were available? They have their sounds stored in waveform ROM, but there was also an option to load extra sounds. The waveform ROM only stores half the waveform cycle while the other half was calculated on the fly, in the same way as single cycle PPG wavetable' waveforms but predating it by several years. I just can't understand why nobody talks more about them. Guess who they are.
Uh, what instrument are you talking about
@@automaticgainsay 😄I was talking about 1974's RMI Keyboard Computer 1 and later 2, and their ancestor: the Allen Computer Organ (1971). And yes, they are rudimentary samplers. You can upload new sounds using punch cards. What they did was to sample mostly organ pipes (but other sounds as well) and reduce them to their minimal spectral harmonic content with a resolution of 16 sample points and store the data in ROM. This was so advanced for the time (we are talking 1971 for the computer organ) that they were truly pioneers. I believe the naming was the culprit: they didn't want to call the KC a synthesizer and it looked more like an organ. Also, the term "sampler" was not widely in use (if at all) yet. March 1995 issue of Keyboard Magazine has a great article about RMI, which was a subsidiary of Allen Organ.
@@alienmachine conn organs had wavetable stuff too
RMI harmonic synthesizer?
A real Trace Trance Trip!
Yamaha GX-1?
I don't know, sample 3 sounds almost FM ish
Polymoog ?
The Doty Marc One ? :)
You CHEATED! How did you know??? :D
@@automaticgainsay hehe....the ultimate polyphonic synthesizer from 1974 :)
The Polymoog prototype, the Apollo!!!
That would actually be a great guess, although I mention that in the video.
Sounds like an ARP Omni to me
There are a lot of similarities, really
No Omni in '74 Explorer was?! though dude
Roland SH-3a? dude
Not polyphonic, Angelo!
Oh you tease… 😉
I'm an antagonist. The answer is: "a poorly-recorded piano." ;)
Sounds like a cheap Bontempi from the Eighties. I guess Dave Spears from GForce Software knows what it is.
Did Bontempis from the 80s have filters?
@@automaticgainsay yes they actually did. They do sound a lot like Farfisa organs in a cheap model. The filters though were usually static and changed with the presets. Old Casios though did have analog filters which sound great,, check for keen on keys or the likes.
@@torbenanschau6641 Well, all organs have "filters," but what I'm asking is if they had voltage-controlled filters with envelopes and resonance. :D
Farfisa VIP 600
Yamaha GS?
The Uli Behringer Lego 80?
YOU GOT IT
@@automaticgainsay Huh?! dude
ARP Explorer I ? dude
hi
Or maybe the Yamaha GX-1
A Korg PE-1000?
The PE-1000 came out later. Interestingly, it was not a top-octave-divide system like this one is!
I started playing in Bands in 1976/77 and we only hat string machines and MS 10...no more idea....?...?
Logan String Ensemble or Solina strings or ARP Omni?.....?
A Radio Shack xxxxx?
There is more than one similarity between this and the MG-1!
🤣👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
Paia Womb
Opus 3?
I think the Opus 3 came out in the early 1980s, the brass section definitely have a similar tone but it is paraphonic not poly
That does not sound good, except for the drumming...
Korg minikorg 700.
most definitely not a poly
So... Sounds divide down and based on your performace it is not per note articulated. Hint about ladder filter, I take that as licenced use. So all that leads to Italy and Crumar. Based on sounds you are playing and 1974. I'd say Crumar Brassman.
I had never heard of the Brassman! That's really cool! Thanks for teaching me something!
@@automaticgainsay Cheers sir! ;-)
I went for Crumar, too... I used to own the Multiman S - sounded a lot like that!
@@AndyVonal Yeah exactly, glad im not alone with this thought process :). Multiman S is lovely, I had couple chances to have one really dirt cheap, but always passed, because I simply dont have room for another such large machine. Loving its sound anyways, especially strings.
When I went to the music store to take my piano lessons (1978) there was a Crumar Orchestrator on display. That was 1978, not 1974. Was it released in 1974? Wasn't it a glorified divide down string machine. Although fully "polyphonic" I thought it had only one filter making it more like paraphony. I classify polyphonic has having one filter per voice. I am flummoxed.
Russian synth.
There were polyphonic synthesisers when Bob moog was still in diapers….they used an oscillator per key (in banks) … I guess they cost a fortune (and there weren’t many in existence) but it existed why it was never adopted no one knows….
You should watch my documentary series on the history of polyphony in regard to that. While instruments like the Hammond Novachord (which was an inspiration to Bob Moog) and the (Bode) Warbo Formant Orgel are two examples of instruments that feature elements we could compare to a modern polysynth, they also lacked elements that we might expect.
In the early 70s, no one was using a Hammond Novachord as a polysynth, although they likely could have tried. It’s largely because the goal of a polysynth at that time was to make use of Moog-like filter behaviors and functions connected to voltage control, which wasn’t focused on previous to Bob’s work.
For example, in order to get modern filter sounds out of a Novachord, you have to manipulate formant filter levers in real-time with your hands.