Synthesizer Show & Tell: Crumar Orchestrator/Multiman-S 

Tarcius T Sousa thanks to you and your beautiful wife!

Emygdio Costa I know right?!?! It’s a tough town I tell ya. Thanks for watching

I know, most of the folks doesn’t really like good instruments, they go with the hype of the new industry that is not even real hardware.

Gastón Delicio thanks!

Fj Francois thanks for the sub! Let me know if you make a 70’s eta romantic film ;)

@@StephenLearson I just upload what you ask me months ago, here is the link I hope you like it ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-laSFhjHj8pk.html

Ronald Figura My thoughts exactly.

ask and you shall receive ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-X9sXZKfMOWw.html

Rainer Nilsen I know Bob Moog helped to design the Spirit, which came 6 years after the orchestrator. Not sure if he had a hand in anything before that. The Spirit has a Moog “look” similar to the Prodigy. I’d really like to know who designed the Orchestrator’s strings as they can’t be beat!

Did you find the joints were bad over time, or cold solder, or what?

I haven’t had any problems with the Crumar yet. It is REALLY noisy as you can probably hear in the video.

Cold solder. The key would say donw and not come back up

aeko the better question is: how is it not possible now?

@@StephenLearson True, but is this just using a massive amount of VCO chips? I've never heard of a synth around this time with so much polyphony.

aeko to be honest I have no idea. I’m working on a video for the ‘76 Korg Poly-Ensemble which does have a VCO per voice. In fact the Poly-Ensemble allows you to tune each key independently which can lead to some interesting micro-tuning possibilities. Unfortunately there isn’t a great deal of literature published on the web about the Orchestrator. And it’s never broken down on me so I haven’t opened her up to look inside. If you find out any info let me know!

It’s called octave dividers. One master osc which freq is divided for each note. you don’t have vcf for each note but it still siunds awesome.

Paul Curreri I have the filter pedal but it stopped working some time ago and I never got around to fixing it. The filter and volume pedals come in handy if you’re playing live, (which would be totally boss)! I played a Performer at a music store once and decided it would be redundant to have both synths. The Performer has an LFO but otherwise I think the Orchestrator wins in the feature department. The piano, bass, and harpsichord sounds are really unique and I would miss them if I just had a Performer. Another difference is size and weight. The Orchestrator is sooo heavy (I don’t think I’ve moved it since I made this video).

Thanks for the reply, Learson. Yeah, definitely a ton of crossover. The size and weight is probably my biggest hesitation, just as our studio is already pretty jammed. If you’d like to sell the filter pedal, I’d probably buy it and try to fix it! Mpaulcurreri@gmail.com. Again, great vid!

李智上 my first synth ever was the Ensoniq ZR-76, but alas it died years ago. I have an ARP Odyssey. Maybe I could do a video on that!

Ask and you shall receive ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-X9sXZKfMOWw.html

The Andre Cato The power is just a standard IEC cable. As far as the chords go, I think you just have to play some.

Good point. There are a few slight differences on this Synth with reference to your comment: 1. The Brass is the only "instrument" that goes through the Emphasis and Contour (Filter & Resonance). 2. The "Cello" and "Violin" have their own cuttoff filter (the String Timbre section), and a dedicated Vibrato and Sustain section 3. The "Piano," "Clavichord," and "Bass" have no filter or vibrato. 4. There are 3 separate 1/4" outputs for Bass, Brass, and Main - so you can also output the sounds to different amps, DAW inputs, pre amps etc. When making the track I multitracked the different sounds to make a more controlled mix. I should have done more to show the versatility of the synth's mixer and splitter. I'll have to make another video!

@@StephenLearson Good points but that is why I called it a filter section. Of course there is more then one filter. As far as I remember these actually shape the different tones from a single extra overtone rich master oscillator with divide down technology. There could also be a row of 12 oscillators with top down division for the lower octaves. I'd have to look that up. Anyway: Per section the filter will work monophonically over all tones within that section. The best test is to hold a few notes and play something else over them. Either the filter will be fully retriggered at every note you play, even for the notes you contantly hold down (multiple triggering) or the filter will not trigger again at all untill you take all your fingers from the keyboard (single triggering). A real polyphonic will always contour every individual note you play seperately. On this istrument this is for a big part offset by introducing the split. So here you at least have one filter per keyboard side. Don't get me wrong though. It's not that I dislike paraphonic machines. Like I said: In a multitrack environment the difference is not that big and I'd rather use a paraphonic with tons of character, like this one, then a polyphonic without it. I just thought it would eb aprecited if I'd point the differences out. And I am always interested in a new track. :-)

Marc Brassé can you give some examples of synths you would you classify as polyphonic? I’m hard pressed to think of examples of an instrument that will trigger a filter-per-voice with more than 2 oscillators.

@@StephenLearson To literaly answer your question is difficult. The lines can be rather fluid. In polyphonics there nowadays normally still is a limit to the number of voices, even when you play VST instruments.The differences have more to do with on board, analog and /or digital, "processing power" and thus economics then anyhting else. The closest one will actually get to full polyphony is on a high end piano type instrument. As far as I know my GEM Promega piano has no such limits and you can still layer 4 individual voice sections with their own physical controls. And gues what: It has a brass sound on board that reminds me quite a bit of that on the Orchestrator. One could call it an early 21st century revival of the same concept. :-) Basically every synthesizer with a certain restriction in voices will normally be a "true" polyphonic. From a 6-voice Juno 60 or 106 to a 64 or 128 voice modern workstation. I saw a Korg Poly 800 in the intro. Now, that one is a paraphonic again. It is 8 voice max but still everything runs through one filter. They did that then to keep the price as low as possible. The giveaway for the paraphonic setup is that it actually enables you to choose for either single or multiple triggering. Again: There is a simple test. Choose a sound with a clear filtering envelope. So one with a long atack and decay. Hold down a bass octave and then play some quick notes higher up. If it's a paraphonic you will get the behaviour I described before. Either the filtering on all notes will restart every time you press a new one or the notes you add will sound muted after the filter has decayed after you pressed the initial bass notes. The only way to really play complicated stuff on such an instrument is basically to leave the filter wide open to start with and use short sounds. That's the only reason they can imitate piano's a bit. Then the filter contouring is more organ-like. As soon as you play a note the filter is almost fully open. Closing it a bit will then sound more like applying some EQ. Get it? :-)

Unfortunately no. I have the specs to build them but have never gotten around to it

@@StephenLearson oh woah, idk where, but i remember someone telling me the crumar is borderline unplayable without the pedals, due to a permanent sustain. But yours dont sound like that at all.

Louie I think it’s just stock pro tools Reverb

Learson Peak ok cool thanks