The slop parameter is not an adequate substitution, nor do I find it all that useful beyond very subtle amounts. This brings up the question why you would spend such a large amount for a Deckard's Dream for example. I suppose you might say because nothing sounds exactly like it.
Either way I question the design choice of this particular synth's lack of a screen.
Sorry... I sometimes fail to completely express a viewpoint for the sake of brevity. And I think we agree more than disagree.
I love my analogues. The OB-6 is an awesome tool — lovely sounding instrument. The Deckard’s Dream (arriving tomorrow! Come on UPS!), I expect it to evoke the same sentiment.
I hope and expect analogue synths to always be designed and made — at least in my lifetime.
Digital synthesis is, however, the evolution of synthesis. It has been since the 80s. And it provides us with new and exciting synthesis techniques and timbres.
I like them both; I suspect 90% of us on this forum agree with that statement.
The slop parameter (Prophet 12, Pro 2) doesn’t turn a digital synth analogue. It is limited by the processing power of the instrument. So no, Slop ain’t it. It is, however, a great step down that road. But an FPGA powered synth has the computational power to be programmed to do this. When you create minute variations in pitch, amplitude, phase, and wave shape calculated at 24MHz, that would be indistinguishable to any human ear (or feelings, or vibe) from analogue (if the algorithms were well written... and I think Dave & Co. could do it).
We haven’t seen it yet, but it’s around the corner. And coming fast.
In short, long live analogue! Digital innovation? yes to that too!