The screen!
This looks possible/easy to manipulate and build a sound on a synth. Slightly fiddly and wordy though.
MC101 sound programming is 20+subpages on a dot matrix screen with 4 parameters per page and endless scrolling back and forth.
Sound wise the 101 might be better but not a joy to work with.(the sound of this does not pull me).
Got one coming from sweetwater! Kept thinking about it and dreamt about it last night haha.
1 Like
Oh man
I was silently reading this forum for a really long while, but this thing really makes me break the silence.
The amount of cool toys released lately goes through the roof. And on one hand it’s ofc great to have this small and affordable yet quite powerful machines. But on the other hand it drives me crazy. Honestly. I’'m looking to build a small dawless setup around my OG DT to pair it with a synth where I want the latter to be not too complicated, I’d even say immediate, and most of all fun to play with. And for the longest time I was having my attention gravitating towards Microfreak. But this Synth synth (lol sorry 
) kinda ticks all the boxes. So I’m really curious to see some comprehensive sound design videos with this little guy.
Anyways, a question to all those who had a chance to spend some time with a Microfreak: from the video’s you’ve seen so far, how would you compare synth engines of the MF and the Polyend Synth?
5 Likes
I would have loved to see 3 separate stereo outs on this one for each synth, that would have been amazing!
3 Likes
uh oh. i just finished oscillator sink’s video and they spoke about getting quite a lot of cpu overload issues 
thats ominous, since early people are just scratching the surface rather than going deep on all the settings… kinda worries me a bit.
Great, now I’ve seen Oscillator Sink’s video that goes more in depth with 2 sound engines and two other videos with just sounds (no talking). Now I have GAS! Thanks Polyend 
I’m just scraping my money together for a DNII! I think next year I’ll take a synthesizer sabatical. Which I already said last year! 
Maybe I’ll watch the BoBeats video again to cool down. 
First of all the Microfreak is monophonic, with 4 voice paraphony. Whereas the Polyend has up to 8 voices of polyphony, although from what I’ve seen not all engines support the 8 voices, some only have 2. So if polyphony is very important for you, the MF may be worse. Of course the MF is also monotimbral, but my guess is that you are asking only about the synth engines themselves and not this.
In that regard, I honestly don’t think the PS is an upgrade, especially with the MF 5.0 firmware. The granular seems better in the MF, and you have several saw and super saw engines to get that analog sound, with all the onboard controls and an extensive modulation matrix that can modulate almost anything with anything (at least from the bo beats video, I got the impression the modulation in the PS was limited ) you have a very very flexible engine . Plus you get sampling and vocoder if you care about that. Wavetable seems to be the same to me. Capable on both, but the MF takes much further due to the matrix.
My take: if you are interested in mostly mono/para sounds, and will process the sound with fx later in the chain, the MF is a winner, and the real competition for you would be the Behringer grind (I have not used yet), and not the Polyend synth.
2 Likes
if you guys know of any clips going in depth on the physical modeling please post them up… everybody just skims over that part
1 Like
Lol, is that Bobeats‘ revamped strategy, getting people to not buy the device? 
1 Like
Plenty on the physical modelling on this vid. Great in depth video!
3 Likes
I have an OG DT. Sticking with it (for now). I’m about to sell the Microfreak.
If I just had the DT and was looking for sample fodder, considering the Microfreak and Polyend Synth, I’d go for the Polyend. Playing the grid buttons and the “followers” will make it much easier to get nice little sequences to mess around with in the DT, or just as companion to record into the DAW, jam with, etc. Depends how comfortable you are with keys (and the MF’s unusual style of keyboard) vs a grid of buttons.
The Polyend also has fx you could apply.
I know it’s a bit more $ but it seems like it would be worth it. The physical modeling and granular sound pretty good to me. The interface and screen seem friendlier than Microfreak. Just my 2 cents. I think you’d be happy either way, but the Polyend has a slight edge, imho.
Word of caution - wait a few months. Let them get any bugs worked out. And maybe an update or two. That’s what I would do. Best of luck.
4 Likes
My thoughts on the Microfreak feel so complicated. Nothing about it is really bad, but I find much of it to be unexciting and I don’t use it much (and the 4 voice limit hurts). However, for $250 - $300ish used, there are very few synths approaching this power level.
On paper it’s a modulation powerhouse, and it excels at getting weird. It’s decent enough at standard subtractive sounds but the filter really leaves something to be desired - it’s so boring I can’t even say I dislike it. There’s no character to it. The MF needs more FX than any other synth I’ve owned - especially EQ, compression, and something to thicken the sound (usually chorus). The supersaw engine is incredible, and I really like the granular/sample oscillator modes. There are about four patches I actually play on my MF with anything approaching regularity these days… and usually I reach for something else, to be honest.
From the videos I’ve watched, Polyend Synth sounds much better. The big catch right now, as always with Polyend, will be bugs/ firmware issues and such. Not sure I’d jump on as an early adopter.
4 Likes
The Don Quixote among the synthfluencers. 
1 Like
Isn’t that a scenario where there wouldn’t be voice stealing on an 8-voice synth? I’m assuming that a bassline and leadline would be monophonic with no overlapping notes.
Bass = 1 voice
Lead = 1 voice
Trad = 3 voices with another 3 available for overlapping notes.
1 Like
You assign polyphony, so if a bass line has a note assigned to it, it will never be stolen.
3 Likes
I don’t have the polyend synth yet, hopefully tomorrow but from what I hear on youtube and instagram it’s way more thicker and mature then microfreak. Microfreak is a toy compared too it and believe me I’ve had it twice and both times I kept thinking the sounds are a bit toyish. I don’t get that vibe from polyend synth.
3 Likes
A SH-4d packs 60 voices and a shitton of effects for about the same price. Those new Korg synths and the S4 run on a Raspi computing module you can buy for $50. So I guess processing power might not be the case.
Besides, if you have 3 send effects and make each one switchable, but only allow for one reverb (because that uses the most processing power), the additional processing power required is negligible, as a mod effect and a delay don’t use that much.
My guess is many synth designers simply see effects more as an afterthought to the sounds, maybe a way to glue several sounds together, rather than an integral element of sound design.
3 Likes
Reading this thread is really making me appreciate the SH-4d even more
The UX can be a pain, but the power to price ratio is pretty great
3 Likes
Thanks for this summary. Exactly my thoughts. When I was looking for my first synth MF was heavily suggested. But to me it sounds so toyish that I couldnt believe it. I ended up with a Minilogue XD (not Exactly its 1 to 1 comparison but ok) because it really doesn’t need anything.
I think Polyend Synth sounds absolutely beautiful in the videos here.
7 Likes
i got a tracker mini about 5 weeks ago – the first couple of days i hated it but then it clicked and now its one of my favorite things to use. enjoy!
3 Likes