What Will Follow the Prophet '08, and When?

[_ADSR_]

If I remember correctly, everyone was pretty shocked when Dave announced the VCO-based P6.

Didn't he state that this was not going to happen?

It seems to me that Moog hit the nail on the head with the Model D re-issue.  Vintage Model D's and P5's (etc.) are holding the value and commanding top dollar for a reason.  The fact that the Model D re-issue is doing well should be a strong indicator that he could be successful in an ~$4,000 re-issue endeavor.

I would think that his next project would have to be either above or below the P6/OB6 price point/sound quality, right?

At least flip a coin, Dave!

[dslsynth]

I would only add a third LFO and a third envelope, but I realize you're probably trying to keep the price down.

As long as its digital LFOs what matters are front panel controls and processor resources. In other words more than two LFOs would quite likely be more affordable than one would think.

[Paul Dither]

If I remember correctly, everyone was pretty shocked when Dave announced the VCO-based P6.

Didn't he state that this was not going to happen?

It seems to me that Moog hit the nail on the head with the Model D re-issue.  Vintage Model D's and P5's (etc.) are holding the value and commanding top dollar for a reason.  The fact that the Model D re-issue is doing well should be a strong indicator that he could be successful in an ~$4,000 re-issue endeavor.

But the Prophet-6 was already the answer to something like a Prophet-5 reissue. Offering it in a different housing would just be a little redundant.

I would think that his next project would have to be either above or below the P6/OB6 price point/sound quality, right?

Sound quality is a very subjective matter, as it always depends on people's personal preferences. There's also much more to do than designing just another analog poly synth. I could at least imagine that there's some space left next to the Prophet-6/OB-6 and the Prophet 12/Pro 2 for a different type of synth engine.

[Sacred Synthesis]

If I remember correctly, everyone was pretty shocked when Dave announced the VCO-based P6.

Didn't he state that this was not going to happen?

Yes, he did.  I specifically remember Dave somewhat laughing about the "VCO crowd."  That was his expression.  A VCO instrument was the last thing to be expected.

[dslsynth]

Yes, he did.  I specifically remember Dave somewhat laughing about the "VCO crowd."  That was his expression.

So that is how Dave The Salesman (TM) sounds. Some customers requested a feature he do not have at that point. All I can say is something as basic as: "what else is new!?" Synthesizer design is not only a challenging meeting between art and engineering. Its also a business.

[_ADSR_]

Sound quality is a very subjective matter,

I agree, Paul.  I should have said "sound character" as a vintage sound is what I would look for in a re-issue.

Nothing against the P6 or the P08.  I proudly have and will be keeping both as they are amazing.   

[MartinM]

Moinmoin,

I seem to read the word "vintage" to often...
By its very nature every single synthesizer is an instrument allowing a multitude of different sounds. What may "vintage" mean under this condition?

Being nearly 60 years of age and making music in bands for 40+ years I do own some instruments, most of them "vintage".
I very appreciate the P'08's (my latest acquisition concerning keyboards) facility to stay in tune, enabling me to play chords after 2 hours on stage or even more time during rehearsals without painful retuning. My monophonic synthesizer from the late 70s may be very "vintage" but does not even allow me to play long single notes in tune with the band without regular retuning. And yes, it is equipped with thermal biasing resistors in its exponentiator circuits.

I remember an interview with John Medeski when he was asked to tell the difference between a "real Hammond" and contemporary digital clones. He told that no normal listener, even no musician would be able to hear the difference in sound on CD. The musician however would experience a big difference when playing it, which of course will make him play different, which may well be heared.
This statement opened my mind. For me "vintage subtractive synthesizer" means a user interface allowing me to tweek all the classical parameters of such an animal. I do not want to search my way through menues and screens, handle mice, computer keypads or touchscreens. i need instant reaction, which analog circuitry certainly delivers.
Another reason is non-linearity: Analog circuits behave more or less "funny" when driven to or pushed above their limits (of linearity). This BTW is where my 70s monophonic really shines.

And let's be true: As with "vintage" guitars of the same make and model, "vintage" Minimoogs, Odysseys, P5, ... do not sound all the same.
Another one: The main difference between Jan Hammer (Moog) and George Duke (Arp) does not lie in their tools.

I respect Sacred Synthesis' opinion, leading him to compare and judge "virgin" sawtooth sounds. For me however the overall sound, which is not only but to the same extent charctarized by filters, is of more importance, and here again at the limits: As with guitarists and horn players the most interesting sounds are at the border to catastrophe. In my opinion this is the main reason for the necessity of instant parameter tweaking. It will be too late when it already howls or blows the tweeters...

I will welcome any instrument allowing this, may it be "vintage" or modern, even "digital". At the moment however, my personal borders of creativity do not lie in my instruments, but in myself. So back to practicing...

Just my opinion, Your mileage may vary of course.

Martin

[Sacred Synthesis]

I respect Sacred Synthesis' opinion, leading him to compare and judge "virgin" sawtooth sounds. For me however the overall sound, which is not only but to the same extent charctarized by filters, is of more importance....

I think we're in agreement on this.  My sawtooth comment was in response to the popular claim that the characteristic "sound" of a synthesizer has only or primarily to do with the filters, and not the oscillators.  On the old forum, one individual went so far as to say that we never hear an oscillator at all, but only a filter.  His point was that all discussion about analog vs. digital oscillators was ridiculous, since we never hear either.  If this is the case, then why do we have a waveform parameter?  Then how can we distinguish a square from a sawtooth, regardless of the filter setting?  If you open wide the cut off frequency or close it to just before the fundamental, even then you can distinguish one waveform from another.

My point, Martin, is that it's a matter of both/and - of both oscillators and filters that result in the characteristic sound of a particular synthesizer.

[Paul Dither]

I respect Sacred Synthesis' opinion, leading him to compare and judge "virgin" sawtooth sounds. For me however the overall sound, which is not only but to the same extent charctarized by filters, is of more importance....

I think we're in agreement on this.  My sawtooth comment was in response to the popular claim that the characteristic "sound" of a synthesizer has only or primarily to do with the filters, and not the oscillators.  On the old forum, one individual went so far as to say that we never hear an oscillator at all, but only a filter.  His point was that all discussion about analog vs. digital oscillators was ridiculous, since we never hear either.  If this is the case, then why do we have a waveform parameter?  Then how can we distinguish a square from a sawtooth, regardless of the filter setting?  If you open wide the cut off frequency or close it to just before the fundamental, even then you can distinguish one waveform from another.

My point, Martin, is that it's a matter of both/and - of both oscillators and filters that result in the characteristic sound of a particular synthesizer.

I guess the polemic statement you referred to may have been made due to the fact that no matter how you adjust the filter settings, each filter will always color the overall sound of the according synthesizer. One obvious example is the Minimoog filter in comparison to the one of the Voyager and the Sub 37. They all sound like Moog, but the Minimoog filter is capable of being opened further, which will always result in more harmonic content.

Other than that, I completely agree with you about the significance of both oscillators and filters.

[DavidDever]

Honestly, I just don't believe that these variances are primarily due to oscillator pitch. The waveshapers (and supporting circuitry) are also part of the equation, though given a decent square wave from DSP / DCO / VCO, it all takes you back through the filters again....

In the case of the Prophet '08, the two (waveshaping + filter) are tightly bound together in one IC per voice; for the Prophet-12, same IC (minus the waveshaping), and the Pro-2 uses none of the above. Frankly, a polyphonic Pro-2 voice configuration would IMHO make an awesome replacement for the Prophet / Mopho / Tetra range.

[Sacred Synthesis]

Paul -

That's true, too.  Each filter has its own characteristics as well.

Just to be clear, the person I referred to above is not on this forum.

[Sacred Synthesis]

Honestly, I just don't believe that these variances are primarily due to oscillator pitch. The waveshapers are also part of the equation, though given a decent square wave from DSP / DCO / VCO, it all takes you back through the filters again....

That's all fine by me.  I'm not arguing that it has only to do with the oscillators, but that it has to do with several things, the oscillators included.  I only object to the claim that a synthesizer's sonic character has nothing to do with the oscillators.  If that's the case, then the differences we see from one sawtooth to the next on an oscilloscope would have no audible effect and would be meaningless.

[_ADSR_]

What may "vintage" mean under this condition?

Dangit!  Got me again... 

[Sacred Synthesis]

For me "vintage subtractive synthesizer" means a user interface allowing me to tweek all the classical parameters of such an animal. I do not want to search my way through menues and screens, handle mice, computer keypads or touchscreens. I need instant reaction, which analog circuitry certainly delivers.

This is so true.  It's the case, not only under live/performance circumstances, but also when in a studio/music room.  It's simply more natural and immediate to have each function available in the form of a physical knob that responds to movement with the hand.  It parallels real life, rather than virtual.

[eXode]

I believe the oscillators are of minor importance in the grand scheme of things, and by that I'm not speaking about DCO vs VCO but the actual shapes, there are hardly any audible differences between pure oscillators. How many synths lets you tap directly from the oscillators anyway? Chances are that they will be processed in the signal path leading up to the VCA, and it's in this path most of the differences is. I've learned over the years that it's the parts that make the whole so that means that it's not enough to have oscillator A or filter B, you need the whole signal path and behavior to match a certain sound. Note that I'm talking about the difference between nailing _that_ sound or just going towards that general direction.

Like I've mentioned before I used to have a modular system. At one point I pursued the Moog sound. I had three really nice classic oscillators, a ladder filter, and a good classic VCA as well but something was missing. Can you guess what the final piece of the puzzle was?

[Sacred Synthesis]

DSI has confirmed it through an email.  Both the Prophet '08 Keyboard and Module have been cancelled and the company is out of stock.

[Paul Dither]

DSI has confirmed it through an email.  Both the Prophet '08 Keyboard and Module have been cancelled and the company is out of stock.

I'm sorry. So the only way to get one is through the remaining retailers now?

What about the Mopho x4? Is it cancelled as well? - I'm just wondering, since it shares the engine.

[Sacred Synthesis]

It's now a matter of scrambling to find Prophet '08's from online stores.  They're still easy enough to find, but that won't be the case for long.  I just checked and there are lots of them on Ebay, for those who are content with used instruments.  But I'm sure those prices are about to jump up a bit with the news.

I don't know about the Mopho x4, but I would guess the same.  DSI will tell you if you ask them. 

Now I have to figure out what I should do.  I didn't want to make a hasty decision like this before seeing what DSI will be showing at NAMM.  Bad timing!

[Paul Dither]

…

[tumble2k]

I believe the oscillators are of minor importance in the grand scheme of things, and by that I'm not speaking about DCO vs VCO but the actual shapes ...

Like I've mentioned before I used to have a modular system. At one point I pursued the Moog sound. I had three really nice classic oscillators, a ladder filter, and a good classic VCA as well but something was missing. Can you guess what the final piece of the puzzle was?

Yes, I think the DCO and VCO sound quite different, but the waves themselves have less importance.

Oh let me guess, was the final piece a Model D reissue?