\ufffd
The way I view the Xpander vs. Matrix-12 is
they were designed for 2 different applications; the
Xpander is a multi-timbral sound module designed with
both CV & MIDI and multiple audio outputs standard
so it can integrate into an analog/digital sequencing
setup. The Matrix-12 on the other hand was designed
for live playing/performing with ability to quickly
setup layers/detuning and have velocity &
aftertouch for expressive playing from it's own
keyboard. Same sounds, just different uses.
Oberheim Xpander came in 1984.
If you go back in Oberheim synth design history,- there was the SEM
module 1st, then the 2-voice, 4-voice, 6- and 8-voice SEM based
polyphonic synths which were very flexible but not stable in tuning,
not very reliable, bulky and storage capacity was very limited.
But this concept designing synths made the Oberheim brand well known
and famous.
Then came the OBX in different polyphonic ( 4-, 6- 8-voice)
configurations,12dB VCFs only,- then the OBXa,-\ufffd w/ 12 and 24dB VCFs
With the OB-8, their own digital bus was introduces, but no MIDI in
OBX, OBXa and OB-8 (when it was introduced).
I buyed my OB-8 already fitted w/ MIDI,- it was one of the later
ones where the digital controlled "Page 2" features were introduced
already which came as a OS update for the previous models.
In fact, these poly synths were all answers on the Prophet 5,
shortly followed by OBX,- and Roland Jupiter 8 (early 1981) followed
by OBXa.
Xpander was a logical consequence because MIDI became very popular
and they wanted to come up w/ the best MIDI implementation every
seen before, but combined this AGAIN w/ the half modular design well
known from Oberheim SEM modules, the multimode filter, as also all
"Page 2 the functionality" from the OB-8 went into the featurelist
of the Xpander.
When they came up w/ the Matrix-12 in 1985 already,- my impression
was, they thought CV/GATE was out of fashion or not necessary
anymore because MIDI dominated.
Ditching single voice outputs and CV/GATE connectors was a big saver
of production costs.
Looking back to 1986 when the Oberheim XK masterkeyboard was
introduced already,- I think they had all in their pockets already
w/ the developement of the Xpander.
It was the 1st machine w/ that high level of digital control.
As I said in a former post, the Matrix-12, for me wasn\ufffdt the ideal
gigging synth because of it\ufffds size and lack of stiffness of it\ufffds
case,- and because MIDI was implemented in several other keyboards
already, I was easier to travel w/ 1 or 2 Xpanders than w/ a Matrix-12.
I sold my OB-8 because of the Xpander and discovering I was able to
re-produce my OB-8 patches on the Xpander by manual re-programming,
both side-by side and using earphones.
That was a\ufffd 6-week programming, but also big learning of the
Xpander.
I've owned both, but currently still have my
M12. The reason is I love programing slowly evolving
pad sounds so the 6 voices of the Xpander were not
enough...having notes drop out when playing chords
just wasn't satisfying.
That\ufffds true,- but using 3 Xpanders w/ a XK surpasses the usage of a
Matrix-12 ... :-)
OTOH, lack of "spillover voices" in the XK doesn\ufffdt make 3 Xpanders a
18-voice poly.
But today and w/ a Kurzweil PC3 model, we\ufffdre able to make a 12-voice
poly out of 2 Xpanders.
However, I certainly appreciate that some
musicians don't use the Xpander for chords, but rather
as 6 individually triggered monosynths,-
Oh no, they probably use it for both and multitimbral chords, just
like the Matrix-12.
How many notes do you need to play a chord, even a long envolving
one and in a musical context ?
According to music theory, you need exactly 4 voices to play every
chord,- skip the root.
so I get why the XP is a more practical
package. Again, that's the beauty of Oberheim
designing 2 different machines.
Yes,- and most interesting w/ Matrix-12 over the Xpander is
Dual-Layer Mode w/ voices/voiceboards slightly detuned,- and have to
leyers as physical controllers,- like in the OBX, OBXa and OB-8
models.
Many Oberheim players missed the levers and weren\ufffdt very familiar w/
wheel pitch bend techniques when they had to control the Xpander by
another MIDI keyboard.
In the past, there was lot of discussion what\ufffds the best,- wheels or
levers.
Keyboardplayers were devided into 2 parties because of this.
The comment about the Detune feature of the M12
being only good for techno-style "Hoover" sounds is
not very fair.
No one said that, it was a comment on stacking ALL OSCs and detune
and there was no comment on the Matrix-12 being only good for techno
style hoover.
If you think about the lush organic quality of
instruments like the OBX and Yamaha CS80 much of that
is due to the individual voice cards inside being
slightly off from each other. Essentially that is what
the Detune feature on the Matrix allows you to
experience...just like in real life where an ensemble
of 12 violinists playing the same note aren't hitting
the exact same pitch and that's what makes the sound
rich.
Best string-, brass- and warm pad sounds by using Matrix-12 in dual
layer mode and using the detune page !
But, I always liked layering/stacking different synths more than
stacking and detune voices of the same synth.
This includes same type of patches in these different synths.
P.
