Hi,
I've just updated the initial post to inlcude a few improvements (the poly aftertouch now actually works and I have also added L and R channel output attenuation pots). Those who allready downloaded the original version can now download the newest version by the renewed link in that post.
I need try this out, also I'm a bit curious as to how many voices you'd get if you go for true polyphony. Just getting 4 voices would be useful in many cases.
It should then just about do 4 voices. "All" you have to do is to copy all the stuff in the main patch excpet the subpatch itself and the output stages, press edit on th esubpatch and copy it into the subpatch screen. Then (re)create the right connections. After that you can delete the superflous elements. You for instance only need 1 MPE.
A distinct disadvantge is however that to access every prameter in a subpatch you also have to add every such item on the subpatch list by richtcliking on the pot in the subpatch (bear with me) and choose the top "connect to to parent" option. That however leads to a long list of parameters on the subpatch opbject in the main screen which does not have a graphic relation to the layout of the synth (it actually lists all elements with a top left to low right priority!).
The only other way to inlfuence a subpatch live is to use MIDI CC messages or a hardware controller box connected to the Axoloti's boards analog inputs.
In other words: Beside the controller listing on the subpatches surface going truly polyphonic in a simple setup only really works if you work out an instrument in mono, program a host of sounds (still in mono) and use the polyphonic subpatch option to only drive presets!
And better not complain about it to loudly becuase I recently got into a row with the webhost for doing just that. 
So do I, cause I just found my Axo but I need to rig-up my keys again first so I'll leave it until tomorrow now, but looking forward to it. I assume from the "big as a desk" comment that you plan to make a full-size MIDI controlled version with Axoloti inside?
Well I hope you're a good carpenter, Brasse, cause such a thing would look amazing if it were craftsman-built from wood 
Now then, Mr Brasse ... opinion time!
Had a play with your CS80, and honestly I wanted to praise it, but I can't. I hope that doesn't sound negative, cause actually, it's quite the opposite. I've drooled over the CS80 many a time, and had it not been for the price of the thing, I would already have one. But your CS80 has made me aware that I wouldn't enjoy that synth even if I had one. Certainly not as much as I thought I would. It's one thing reading about it, but it's another when the functions are there in front of you, it makes you realise certain things.
I had not noticed the lack of LFO, nor had I realised how cumbersome it feels to go from oscillator to output. CS80 sounds awesome, but if I had a CS80, honestly, I think I would get tired of it's structure or 'architecture' pretty quick.
As for your specific version, I'm surprised you didn't set it to the classic Vangelis Bladerunner sound by default, so that was a bit of a bummer, but all that aside, my opinion after experiencing it is that it's an interesting architecture but not for me, it's not a synth I would get along with if I had one.
So your CS80 didn't inspire me, but it definitely did help me out in other ways, only thing is, I'm not sure whether I like the idea of no longer wanting a CS80, lol, it feels very wrong somehow 
Sorry, Axoman but you really do not get it.
This is no perfect replica of a CS80. I did not call it CS80ish for nothing. It is a model that can help you to create typical CS80 sounds on an Axoloti. I could go on trying to get even closer to the real thing and clutter up the user interface and deminish the voice count in th emean time but like I said in my introduciton: This is more of a sidepath then the main stream.
Some specific remarks though:
- The CS80 has a dedicated LFO. A very flexible one actually. So intall one if you want one.
- More imporant though: Typical for the CS80 is that it actully already has a dedicated LFO for about every worthwhile function. So there is a LFO for PWM, and there is one for the Ring modulator in this model so yu can already modulate the hell out of this thing without an extra routable LFO. Crank open the PWM LFO and the thning even moves into FM, something the real thing never could! Understand the Ring MOD's LFO/Env. generator combi and you wil already modulate to Nirvanna without ever feelling the need for anyhting else.
- The layout of a CS80 is very logical but in this Axoloti "recreation" other things where more important. If you do get the whole Paraphonic approach I talked about you might actually understand why the "VCA's" are actually in front of the Filter.
- One of the most important features on the CS80 are its velocity and polyphonic aftertouch facilities. As long as you cannot try out the real thing the best way to get a inkling of the CS80's potential is to first get an understaning of what polyphonic aftertouch can do for you in general.
- More importantly: Even when owning the real thing one could still circle around it for years without getting to grips with it's real potential. Playing around with synths is more then pressign one single key and tweaking the filter control and LFO speed to death, in th emena time constantly ignoring the ADSR's in the process (I'm basically describing about 80% of all Youtube "demo's" with that, Grrr!).
I could go on for quite a while only talking about such stuff but I think the CS80's reputation is deformed anyway. When you talk about certain "classic" instruments people immediately start building their own personal myths around them. The fact that you ask for THAT BLADE RUNNER SOUND is already a very bad sign. people running after THAT sound has already created an Internet vortex in itself.
You know what. THAT sound is basically a very simple sawtooth construction. The special thing is how expressive something like that can get when you play it well on a CS80. Scoop: If you know what you are doing you actually do not need a CS80 for it!
Again: I could go on like this for hours;
Here's some dedicated information though.
- Understanding my paraphonic approach: https://sebiik.github.io/community.axoloti.com.backup/t/polyphony-power-user-tips/3957
- To get a better impression of the real things layout: https://www.manualslib.com/manual/778093/Yamaha-Cs-80.html
- Taking a deeper look at what makes the CS80 tick: http://www.brassee.com/writing.html#cs80
- If you still insist on THAT sound: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fne0oIEv-WI
Please work through that first and then come back again, providing you are stil interested. 
I thought it would be more interesting, inherently, as well. But then again, we lowly troglodytes just don't get it.
There was a VST emulation I had at one point that seemed to produce a huge variety of different sounds, I think the problem may be that the layout/knob/toggle access is what makes a huge difference?
As far as I am concerned there is no right or wrong here. This has been discussed before and wil be discussed many times more again: It's not a matter of being troglodytes or not. Sorry of that is the impression one might get from my explanations.
Everybody has to do music his own way. Getting into the deeper side of Axoloti however means that one starts to conceptualize what a synth does and getting the best out of these insights. Some people here go a lot deeper then I do (for instance into coding and the arithmatic behind sound). They in their turn humble me.
I do however dare to say that if you are not prepared to go rather deep there is not that much sense in "going Axoloti". You might find loosing interest quite quickly after the novelty aspect wears away. Better buy yourself the next VST, a hardware synth or even a "real" modular then and start turning knobs and stuff at random. Many a fine sound has been created that way.
What I have merely been trying (again: as a sidepath) is to set up something that can make convincing CS80 sounds. Using the name of one of the synths with the most overblown reputations (even if rightly so) might however have been a mistake. I probably should have called this post "Free Quite A Bit Yamaha CS-family Sounding Axoloti Patch If You Are Not Too Particular About It" but people nowadays simply need hyperboles to become interested at all.
As far as a comparison to VST's is concerned. You can take it from me that my thingy sounds much more like the real deal then any VST I've heard. I wil however not make a whole set of presets to prove it. That would actually be defeating the whole point. Troglodyte or not, in one respect Axoman is right. If you do not get this on your own strengths you'll probably also not get the original.
What about something like this however?: "Hey, you forgot the modulation generator but I just added one myself by linking a thingemajig module with a whatzitcalled invertor. Here's my download in return!" or "Man, I just found a way to add polyphonic portamento (Oops, just gave away another "glaring" ommision!)".
Now that sort of stuff would really warm my heart. As far as the "It's not the real thang, dude!" part of the discussion is concerned I would however like to quote the big bad computer in Tron:
END OF LINE
YES!
but to make the thing work as it does taking a few liberties with the layout was unavoidable.
A real obvious example is that the "VCA's" are in front of the filters. But I've explained that decission thoroughly enough elsewhere.
One other example though: The placement of a modules in a subpatch determines the position of a parented controller in the list on the suppatch object's surface (Excuse me?) so I actually had to reshuffle things a bit in that subpatch screen to get the oscillator control listing that is now visible in the main screen.
User tip: Just follow the patchcords! Are you for instance aware that you can switch of specific types of patchcords in the upper right corner of the screen. So why not only leave the audiopaths visible?
Put aside the other specifics of the CS80, two import features of the "Blade Runner" sounds are the polyphonic aftertouch as delicately played by Vangelis and the Lexicon 224 reverb (long and slow modulated chorusing reverb). The interaction between the finger shaped tones and the infinite reverberation is one of the key for this lush sound.
The CS80 and the GX1 (Stevie Wonder's Dream Machine) are capable of doing many other sounds (strings à la "Pastime Paradise for example) thanks to the specifics @brasso pointed out.
Er, since that, often imitated, particular line is monophonic you do not need polyphonic aftertouch for it. Not even monophonic aftertouch if you have a hand to spare. One can actually add almost all needed expression by simply tweaking the filter control live!
More in general your remark is however spot on.
I simply wanted to show something else that the BladeRunner sound.
It is played polyphonically, there is the line and other stuff played together.
There is also the darker "Village Ghetto Land", for nice polyphonic strings :
If you assume that the rumbling background bass was played on the same instrument in one go you are of course right. Not sure myself though. About that Village Ghetto Land example however no such doubt exist.
You re right, the GX1 has a pedal board, but i don't think it is pressure sensitive !
Much less effects and an almost raw sound, but few people know this one.
@brasso I like the patch - I think at it's core it sounds good. The only thing that seems a little strange is the two banks of filters seem to act for the left or right channel independently, whereas they are labelled as if it's two types of filters? this confused me. Also mucking around with the filter env's really didn't seem to actually do anything to the filters. Maybe I need to experiment a little more...
The ring mod (with the env) sounds awesome, but really mucks with the left/right balance when engaged.
Any thoughts on how to get the CPU down a little so that a verb or chorus can be added to the end of it? Anything I put in there pushed it to 100%!
Now that is more like it: Specific questions!
Most stuff you ask does however still fall into 3 catagories:
I have basically given you all the info you need in the previous posts so my best advice would be to revisit post 1 and 18 and (re)do the homework.
As far as your specific questions go though:
Firstly: Just to make sure we talk about exactly the same version. Did you upload the latest version (see the ammendment remark at the end of post 1)
The only thing that seems a little strange is the two banks of filters seem to act for the left or right channel independently, whereas they are labelled as if it's two types of filters? this confused me.<
The CS80 has 2 fully independent channels with a their own oscillator mix. To save processing power ( again: re-read the earlier stuff) I decided on a paraphonic approach AND on feeding one (more flexible!) oscillator mix into both channels.
You are however right about the labeling. That is a bit of residue from my main The Holy Grail project (which see). I'll correct it and place a new version under the downlod link in post 1. Thanks for the remark.
Also mucking around with the filter env's really didn't seem to actually do anything to the filters. Maybe I need to experiment a little more...<
Now let me gues: You cranked the 5th pot in the envelopes fully open. Understand that this is no real CS-type 5 stage envelope. It is a regular ADSR with the 5th pot acting as a reversed depth control. If youy leave pot 5 on zero the ADSR will work full tilt. If you put it on 10 the ADSR will however have NO effect at all. So first put pot 5 on zero and then try again.
Furhtermore the Axoloti filters seem to have quite narrow "'sweet spots". If this was still a real analog one could say they could have chosen thier pots with more care. So do not jank them from one side to the other too much but take your time trying out the inbetween settings.
The ring mod (with the env) sounds awesome, but really mucks with the left/right balance when engaged. <
I actually love that kind of stuff and there are enough level and alternative routing controls to get to a good balance. But you can of course also mix all signals into one single end-mixer.
Any thoughts on how to get the CPU down a little so that a verb or chorus can be added to the end of it? Anything I put in there pushed it to 100%! <
Basic Axoloti 1: Put the instrument on a low polyphony count first, maybe even 1 voice only. Then make the the changes you want to make. Only try how far you can go up with the polyphony count again after you've got the path working. I expect the instrument to still be able to be 8-voice paraphonic after adding an effect. Do however understand that the longer the delay time the effect can provide is (and thus the amount of memory it needs) is the more processor-hungry the module will be. So a chorus needs only a bit of processing power but a reverb will set you back a lot further.
Basic Axoloti 2: Do ALWAYS press the UPDATE button on the subpatch module in the main screen after you change something in the subpatch. Otherwise nothing will actually change!
Gulp! Just sending you another version would have been a lot quiker then explaining all this but this way you will actually learn stuff. So put your hands together for our (equally free) Axoloti / CS80 course.
hahaha yep you nailed me with most of it 
I should do some reading on the CS80 - do you mean that it is essentially like 2 separate Poly's with a discreet path (osc>filter>vca etc) for both channels? And you have condensed these back down a bit to save power? Makes sense. Very interesting.
I WAS cranking the fifth pot of the ADSR, expecting it to be like the "contour" of a usual filter/env routing. Good advice on the filters too - I've dug through most of the filters trying to find one that I really bond with. That said I usually use a Sherman so I'm a little spoilt for filters...!
Great tip on reducing polyphony (or paraphony, I suppose) to squeeze in a filter. I reckon I could get away with 6 voices and still be happy with it. Next step is to borrow a controller that transmits poly aftertouch to get properly expressive.
I definitely struggle with understanding the complexities of the Axoloti overall - while I understand most of the normal objects, anything too complex or code-y just goes over my head. I think this will either happen in time or it won't - I'm pretty adverse to things that delve me too far into the technical sphere and away from the creative (one of the reasons I closed my engineering business), so I try and stay in the creative zone as much as I can. That said, I'm getting lots of mileage out of the pre-made objects, which is a bonus as I only really bought the Ax as a USB host device for my OP1.
Thanks for the help!
should do some reading on the CS80 - do you mean that it is essentially like 2 separate Poly's with a discreet path (osc>filter>vca etc) for both channels? And you have condensed these back down a bit to save power? Makes sense. Very interesting. <
Exactly!
Next step is to borrow a controller that transmits poly aftertouch to get properly expressive. >
You won't regret it!
I definitely struggle with understanding the complexities of the Axoloti overall - while I understand most of the normal objects, anything too complex or code-y just goes over my head. >
Welcome to the club. I consider myself to be rather synth savy but working through the Axoloti's particulars is already quite a task in itself. The info one needs is all over the place! If only somebody would write a better user guide.
Besides that aspect though: Getting the best out of a system is often a matter of working your way around its shortcomings in a creative way. As it stands the Axoloti can actually not deliver a full CS80. But it can get awfully close!
I just made the updates to post 1. No more inconsistent labeling (I hope!)
@blaerg
Yup, must be a troglodyte thing, I'm sure ol'brasso thinks I'm a troglodyte anyway
@brasso
Well, in all honesty it did feel a bit tongue-in-cheek daring to make my post, but as I said, it was not meant as negative in any way. It's actually a relief to hear your reply, cause at least I feel comfortable about wanting a CS80 again. I should point out though, that my reasons for thinking what I thought are actually your own doing. First I saw the title of this thread and assumed you had recreated a CS80 on your Axo. A reply from you then pointed out you hadn't gone to the length of modelling the filter etc. At that point I still thought, well, cool stuff anyway, at least I get to play around with the CS80 in a control sense.
I had no idea you had not done that either, therefore I assumed I was playing with a CS80. I could have looked into it to re-familiarise myself, but as it was you who created it I didn't feel the need to do that, assuming it would be all 'present and correct' so to speak.
@SmashedTransistors
Nice to know how the sound was achieved. I pretty much assumed that already apart from the aftertouch, I just assumed it was done with an LFO. Again though, the only reason I mentioned that sound is because Marc (I think it was Marc) once posted about getting that sound. After seeing that, and him announcing a CS80, it just seemed logical that he'd use that sound as the default sound to demonstrate his CS80.
I got that wrong too, I guess it's one of the hazards of me being a troglodyte 
I must add that many people suggest that this string sound is a combination of the GX-1 and of the Moog CE String Filter. The Moog CE String Filter is a static bank of 30 or 40 high resonance filters. (CE stands for Custom Engineering, a particular division of Moog that produced very rare modules).