The Official Sequential/Oberheim Forum
SEQUENTIAL/DSI => Pro 3 => Topic started by: patrickdsp on January 15, 2020, 03:54:39 PM
-
Sequential Pro 3 Introduction ;D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ir_k6E17_Ps
-
Keyless version coming eventually in Desktop or Rack format?
-
Keyless version coming eventually in Desktop or Rack format?
I doubt it. Never happened for the Pro 2. If anything I think we might see another instrument (either another poly synth or possible Tempest successor) before we see a desktop/rack format version of the Pro 3.
-
Nice intro/demo video! I'm excited. Inclusion of the Moog T-Ladder filter is a great choice (hope its included in next Poly release too) - and the hybrid oscillator combo is nice.
That 32 slot mod matrix with 171 destinations and the sequencer is gonna allow for some extremely deep sound design and mod sequences. Preparing for the bleeps, the creeps and the sweeps.
-
Exciting stuff! Microtuning out of the gate or will we have to wait on this one like the Pro2??
-
I'm expecting to have mine in about a week or two. (https://youtu.be/dbwUFUNTcz4?t=425) 8)
-
Exciting stuff! Microtuning out of the gate or will we have to wait on this one like the Pro2??
It's a standard feature on the Pro 3.
-
https://youtu.be/O1k_4sO0GNY
-
Keyless version coming eventually in Desktop or Rack format?
Do hope for that. Rack size would be great because desktops are so unhandy large . The form factor of the P12M is ideal because it then can still be put on the rack shelf taking minimal space when not used for knobbing and just MIDI use. Could remove the sequencer buttons to create space for desktop/rack and edit seq/ via the screen. P12M ID was very different than the P12 keys but still easy to use and it is still in retail. Too bad it did not have MIDI sample dump standard to load samples or wave-tables, so hope this will. (Not prop. format like Nord among others. Standard MIDI is a big reason to keep buying Sequential products. Q: To which Sequential/DSI products the 2 Analog Oscs can be compared to ? Perhaps wooden side panel as an option for the std. version ?
-
Exciting stuff! Microtuning out of the gate or will we have to wait on this one like the Pro2??
It's a standard feature on the Pro 3.
Yessssss!!! Very nice. GASsing for the SE now…
-
Q: To which Sequential/DSI products the 2 Analog Oscs can be compared to ?
The VCOs can be compared to the ones of the Prophet-6. However, they are not identical:
Shape mod (known as PWM if applied to a pulse waveform) now also affects the triangle and sawtooth shapes and anything in between triangle and sawtooth, sawtooth and pulse. On top of that, not only the shape mod parameter can be modulated, but also the shape selection parameter that allows you to continuously morph between triangle, sawtooth and pulse shapes.
-
Exciting stuff! Microtuning out of the gate or will we have to wait on this one like the Pro2??
It's a standard feature on the Pro 3.
Plus: the tuning can now be chosen on a per program basis. It's no longer a global parameter only.
-
I can't justify a new synth right now, but this is definitely on my GAS list.
-
I hope someone at Sequential will answer this question:
What audio sample rate are the mod matrix working at? If you can send oscillators out the CVs via mod matrix I assume it must be at least 44.1khz?
I think I remember that the Prophet 12 ran at a slower rate, and wanted to know if this has been improved on the pro3?
-
Is the SE a limited edition as well? Or can we expect equal availability as the standard pro 3?
-
Is the SE a limited edition as well?
No, Dave said he's not down with those types of shenanigans. (https://youtu.be/TDXs13tGmxA?t=666)
-
Is the SE a limited edition as well?
No, Dave said he's not down with those types of shenanigans. (https://youtu.be/TDXs13tGmxA?t=666)
...anymore ;)
https://www.sequential.com/product/prophet-12-limited-edition/
-
Is the SE a limited edition as well?
No, Dave said he's not down with those types of shenanigans. (https://youtu.be/TDXs13tGmxA?t=666)
...anymore ;)
https://www.sequential.com/product/prophet-12-limited-edition/
The white edition was the original design of the Prophet 12. They were discontinuing it anyway so they needed to clear out some space lol
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=or6CpbGRLFY
Not sure if it's very different from the other videos but here's one from the UK store Andertons with Dave presenting again :)
-
A comprehensive presentation by Gerry Bassermann:
https://youtu.be/oT5L5WqcBOk
-
A comprehensive presentation by Gerry Bassermann:
https://youtu.be/oT5L5WqcBOk
Nice to see in the video that we can replace the buttons with the regular ones :)
-
Gerry's using a beta unit here, which had different potentiometers.
We're using a new potentiometer in the Pro3, and the round black knobs with the aluminum caps do not fit them correctly.
-
Gerry's using a beta unit here, which had different potentiometers.
We're using a new potentiometer in the Pro3, and the round black knobs with the aluminum caps do not fit them correctly.
Somehow they do not look good on this synth in my opinion, så I'm glad you chose the other ones.
-
Gerry's using a beta unit here, which had different potentiometers.
We're using a new potentiometer in the Pro3, and the round black knobs with the aluminum caps do not fit them correctly.
Does this mean they will be free from the problem where the pot shafts went wobbly (lateral movement) on earlier synths?
-
We think the pots feel great; you'll have to try them for yourself.
-
We think the pots feel great; you'll have to try them for yourself.
Absolutely looking forward to being able to try one out. Hopefully they’ll be in stores when I am in Berlin at the end of next month.
-
Gerry's using a beta unit here, which had different potentiometers.
We're using a new potentiometer in the Pro3, and the round black knobs with the aluminum caps do not fit them correctly.
The proto-type design that Gerry is using, looks aesthetic a lot better to me. It's beautiful! I love those classic Sequential knobs!
-
Gerry's using a beta unit here, which had different potentiometers.
We're using a new potentiometer in the Pro3, and the round black knobs with the aluminum caps do not fit them correctly.
The proto-type design that Gerry is using, looks aesthetic a lot better to me. It's beautiful! I love those classic Sequential knobs!
Whilst I like the knobs on my P6 I think the new knobs look really good on the standard version of the P3. The black and grey caps are more suited to the black and greyish panel compared to the older knobs (in my opinion). The newer knobs are also supposed to be more sturdy with less wobble (perhaps due to the new pots). I also happen to think the standard version of the P3 looks better than the SE. To me it looks more 'nasty/punk' and suits the industrial/aggressive sounds it clearly does so well. Don't get me wrong, I love the walnut on my P6.....but the P3 sounds like a beast. And I want it to look that way as well ;)
-
Funny how people find one or the other prettier... personally, I find the SE version miles ahead in looks compared to the standard version, and I do not feel the normal Sequential knobs look good on any of them either... they look like they were replaced... the SE version to me also looks like much better quality which it better be for that price addition.
The Standard does look nice, but it reeks “Dave Smith Instruments” as of the older designs, and I think it would have looked cooler with some wooden end cheeks that give some contrast... another thing is the reversed coloring of the panel... I find that the SE looks better with the groupings in black on greyblue background.
But hey, each to his own... people do have different tastes. At least I am happy the SE version is the one I like best since that is the one I will be ordering next friday :)
And let me say this; if Sequential manage to create at least an eight voice polysynth, with the PRO 3’s character, then it will be a hit, I am 100% certain of that... just upp it with an extra identical wavetable oscillator, and keep the ladder and OB filters in there, with serial or parallel routing options.
-
Funny how people find one or the other prettier... personally, I find the SE version miles ahead in looks compared to the standard version, and I do not feel the normal Sequential knobs look good on any of them either... they look like they were replaced... the SE version to me also looks like much better quality which it better be for that price addition.
The Standard does look nice, but it reeks “Dave Smith Instruments” as of the older designs, and I think it would have looked cooler with some wooden end cheeks that give some contrast... another thing is the reversed coloring of the panel... I find that the SE looks better with the groupings in black on greyblue background.
But hey, each to his own... people do have different tastes. At least I am happy the SE version is the one I like best since that is the one I will be ordering next friday :)
And let me say this; if Sequential manage to create at least an eight voice polysynth, with the PRO 3’s character, then it will be a hit, I am 100% certain of that... just upp it with an extra identical wavetable oscillator, and keep the ladder and OB filters in there, with serial or parallel routing options.
Neither one screams "sexy" to me. They both look very technoid--sort of like grooveboxes from the 00s. BUT more importantly the knob and function layout looks very well designed, e.g. screen in the middle, large cutoff knob, symmetric layout for EG knobs unlike the Rev2 where I have to remember that the left bottom knob is attack for filter but delay for the other EGs, etc.
A poly version would be awesome but also probably pricey with its VCOs, VCFs per voice, getting the sequencer and audiorate modulation to work well VCOs, etc.
-
Gerry's using a beta unit here, which had different potentiometers.
We're using a new potentiometer in the Pro3, and the round black knobs with the aluminum caps do not fit them correctly.
The proto-type design that Gerry is using, looks aesthetic a lot better to me. It's beautiful! I love those classic Sequential knobs!
Whilst I like the knobs on my P6 I think the new knobs look really good on the standard version of the P3. The black and grey caps are more suited to the black and greyish panel compared to the older knobs (in my opinion). The newer knobs are also supposed to be more sturdy with less wobble (perhaps due to the new pots). I also happen to think the standard version of the P3 looks better than the SE. To me it looks more 'nasty/punk' and suits the industrial/aggressive sounds it clearly does so well. Don't get me wrong, I love the walnut on my P6.....but the P3 sounds like a beast. And I want it to look that way as well ;)
The only thing I like on the SE is the Sequential name plate. That’s it. I agree though, I can totally picture the standard on top of a Crumar Seven played by some dude with slicked back hair, sunglasses and a cigarette in his mouth surrounded by smoke and fellow band mates.
-
the SE version to me also looks like much better quality which it better be for that price addition.
The Standard does look nice, but it reeks “Dave Smith Instruments” as of the older designs,
It has a tilt panel and wood- and the badge- those are the only differences- for 500 dollars- have fun lol
What older design does the Pro 3 look like? No one agrees with you lol.
If anything the SE looks old and vintage while the Pro 3 looks modern.
-
Best Monosynth Award by Sonicstate:
https://youtu.be/bCLWYeASaCU?t=934
-
the SE version to me also looks like much better quality which it better be for that price addition.
The Standard does look nice, but it reeks “Dave Smith Instruments” as of the older designs,
It has a tilt panel and wood- and the badge- those are the only differences- for 500 dollars- have fun lol
What older design does the Pro 3 look like? No one agrees with you lol.
If anything the SE looks old and vintage while the Pro 3 looks modern.
First off, I do not like the 500 extra, I only need it because of the tilt, because of workflow... that's just how it is, and believe me, I've tried to find other setups that would allow me to get the stadard version instead because in the end, to me, the sound is what matters the most... this has NOTHING AT ALL to do with bling bling value or the like, but that said I DO like the SE look better... I just wonder what makes people choose what they do when they chose differently than me... vintage or modern... The SE is for me, as it allow me to tilt the panel so I can easily reach the knobs from the position in which the PRO3 SE will be placed. It IS an expensive "tilt" for sure, but I guess it is worth it to me.
You ask what older versions the PRO3 standard look like? ... I feel they look more like the older models with the Dave Smith Instruments logo on them, topped with Tempest like knobs... no wood (except end cheeks) ... not 100%, but a great deal ahead. This is my opinion, and I don't really care if you agree or not ::)
-
Best Monosynth Award by Sonicstate:
https://youtu.be/bCLWYeASaCU?t=934
Presented by Nick and Grizzly Adams at that!
-
The colorful notch ring around the cutoff (on both) remind me of synths from the early aughts. Furthermore, the standard edition has a chintzy overlay that does hark back to aughts era DSI gear. Also, I was under the impression the ends are plastic for the standard edition, not wood. Now if the "bling" upgrades are worth the extra $500, that's up to buyers, but for my money I'd like to see classier looking knobs included that match the rest of the SE design.
-
And just to let the facts out: in the video linked to in my thread on the SE tilt, Dave clearly state that they initially thought they would sell a few SEs and a lot more standards, but it turns out it is about equal... So i guess more people agree with me, than some initially thought ;D
Both look good, but to me there is something slick about the SE version I just like better, in addition to the tilt option... Also notice that on SE version, the jacks on the back have been bolted to the chasis, it is not on the standard... That witnesses to me about at least some better build quality for the added cost.
Also, I read someone state that the SE version is a great deal heavier than the standard version. While that may not seem important, it does help make the synth stand more firmly and not be easily pushed around.
In fact it would be nice if Sequential told a little bit about what it is you get for 500 dollars more.. And in a bit more detail, so people may see the true value of the added cost.
-
Also, I read someone state that the SE version is a great deal heavier than the standard version.
According to the specs, the SE version is a whopping 11 pounds more.
Standard - Weight: 16 lbs
SE - Weight: 27 lbs
-
Also, I read someone state that the SE version is a great deal heavier than the standard version.
According to the specs, the SE version is a whopping 11 pounds more.
Standard - Weight: 16 lbs
SE - Weight: 27 lbs
Seems to be a good explanation, that the standard is perhaps best for live gigging musicians as it is also lighter, and the SE version more for permanent studio usage... anyway, I just ordered my SE version today, but there will go about 4-5 weeks before it's in stock at Thomann :'( :( ;D
-
Does the SE have an aluminum panel, while the standard has a plastic panel?
Graphics silk-screened on SE but adhesive overlay for standard?
-
Does the SE have an aluminum panel, while the standard has a plastic panel?
Graphics silk-screened on SE but adhesive overlay for standard?
It actually looks like it is a sticker on the standard, just as they did with the prophet 8 and evolvers... Seems that the 400 dollar value gets more and more reasonable...
-
Would’ve been nice if the SE had a 44 key keybed too.
-
Would’ve been nice if the SE had a 44 key keybed too.
I hear you, except in my case I do not have the space for that extra octave, so I will not complain... But I probably would find that space if I had to... And the Paraphonic playing could use that extra octave for sure... In my case, I will be having the TP8S of my Quantum connected via MIDI, so I can always play the PRO3 from a 5oct keybed... Lucky me ;D
-
Also, I read someone state that the SE version is a great deal heavier than the standard version.
According to the specs, the SE version is a whopping 11 pounds more.
Standard - Weight: 16 lbs
SE - Weight: 27 lbs
I wonder what material differences there are, since the SE is almost 5.5kg heavier... SE is more than 13kg total, which to me seems rather heavy for a 3oct synth :)...
-
Would’ve been nice if the SE had a 44 key keybed too.
Absolutely. For that reason alone I'm not interested in the Pro 3.
-
Also, I read someone state that the SE version is a great deal heavier than the standard version.
According to the specs, the SE version is a whopping 11 pounds more.
Standard - Weight: 16 lbs
SE - Weight: 27 lbs
I wonder what material differences there are, since the SE is almost 5.5kg heavier... SE is more than 13kg total, which to me seems rather heavy for a 3oct synth :)...
Wood. Lots of wood!
-
Would’ve been nice if the SE had a 44 key keybed too.
Nah. No point. It has less voices than the Pro 2.
-
Would’ve been nice if the SE had a 44 key keybed too.
Nah. No point. It has less voices than the Pro 2.
With paraphonic playing, that ekstra octave could quickly become useful though...
-
Would’ve been nice if the SE had a 44 key keybed too.
Nah. No point. It has less voices than the Pro 2.
With paraphonic playing, that ekstra octave could quickly become useful though...
If it's completely necessary there's always MIDI 101.
-
Would’ve been nice if the SE had a 44 key keybed too.
Nah. No point. It has less voices than the Pro 2.
With paraphonic playing, that ekstra octave could quickly become useful though...
If it's completely necessary there's always MIDI 101.
Not if you want a selfcontained synth to take on the road... Unless you want the extra hazzle... Still, for the added price it would have been a welcome extra for many I think... But as stated, I personally am fine with only 3... Less space to take up, and I will play it mainly from the Quantum anyway.
-
Best Monosynth Award by Sonicstate:
https://youtu.be/bCLWYeASaCU?t=934
Presented by Nick and Grizzly Adams at that!
Gaz Williams is a lovely guy, I spent an enjoyable few hours at his house last year nerding over synths and he kindly let me try out his Industrial Radio MIDIBass which has led me to ordering one.
-
So, when he says 32 sets of 16 wavetables, that means the pro 3 ships with 512 wavetables? Or does he really mean 32 sets of 16 waveforms? as in 32 wavetables? If there really is 512 wavetables thats great news and a quite big step up from the number we saw in the Prophet 12.
-
So, when he says 32 sets of 16 wavetables, that means the pro 3 ships with 512 wavetables? Or does he really mean 32 sets of 16 waveforms? as in 32 wavetables? If there really is 512 wavetables thats great news and a quite big step up from the number we saw in the Prophet 12.
Each of the 32 waveTABLES has 16 waveFORMS that you scan thru in 256 discrete steps (it interpolate between the 16 waveFORMS)... That add up to 32*16 discrete waveFORMS stored in memory in total for all the waveTABLES. ..
You can morph thru the 16 waveFORMS in a waveTABLE in 256 steps as mentioned creating additional waveFORMS... So in theory, you have 32*256 different waveFORMS available... 256 per waveTABLE.
So no... You do not get 512 waveTABLES... You get 32... But the interview gave the impression that they are considdering either user wavetables or factory added ones in a later OS update... I personaly hope they go all the way with user wavetables.
An alternative middleground to dumping of user waveFORMS to the PRO3 could be to simply let users select the 16 waveFORMS in a waveTABLE, and in what order they should be in that table, choosing from the allready available 512 waveFORMS...
That would eliminate all the hazzle of preset compatibility between several PRO3s with different user waveTABLES in memory since all would allways have the same waveFORMS, only the waveTABLES would differ, but as these fill only few bytes the user waveTABLE could be stored with the preset! ...
In fact I think this would be the most useful implementation, and if Sequential wanted to include more waveFORMS they could easily add them, and preset integrity would still remain.
Ps. I am in no way hinting at you being dumb or anything, by writing TABLE and FORM in capital letters... It is only to make my rant easier to decipher as these two terms are being said over and over again, and it is so darn easy to mix them up :)
-
Seems like so many people focused so much on oscillator count that they missed the huge expansion in the oscillator function—morphing and number of waves. I think the Pro 2 only had 32 waveforms and you could only morph between the one before and after. Not that this is a Pro 2 mk II of course...
-
Seems like so many people focused so much on oscillator count that they missed the huge expansion in the oscillator function—morphing and number of waves. I think the Pro 2 only had 32 waveforms and you could only morph between the one before and after. Not that this is a Pro 2 mk II of course...
Waveformwise, PRO3 is a great step up yes... There were 3 waveforms in the PRO2 wavetables compared to 16 in PRO3.
And the analog oscillators also have a huge of variety as all waveforms has both a continuous shape knob and a Shape Mod knob... I do not know the resolution there, but if they are like with the digital oscillator, having 256 settings each, then the analog oscillators would give your 256*256 different tonal waveforms... That is huge!... Now add the possibilities in syncing them also and the number gets out of this world... Oh... And FM, AM etc ffom the mod matrix would make it even crazier.
I would say that PRO3 do not lack sonic variety for certain.
-
Ps. I am in no way hinting at you being dumb or anything, by writing TABLE and FORM in capital letters... It is only to make my rant easier to decipher as these two terms are being said over and over again, and it is so darn easy to mix them up :)
Thanks for pointing that out ;) Anyhow Ive seen pretty much all Pro 3 vids on youtube, and Dave often says 32 sets of 16 wave tables, so I thought, that sounds suspiciously high for a DSI/Sequential synth so I figured it be worth double checking. Anyhow, I'm def warming up to this one, but will hold out for the next announcement, as I'm more of a poly kind of person, hoping it will be a big brother kind of thing (Maybe something that does P6+OB6 and more). Although I've seen the light regarding how paraphonic modes can create alot of happy accidents and stuff to help the creative process. I kinda think a number of paraphonic modes should be an option on poly synths too as there are a couple of cool modes that all give their sound.
-
Seems like so many people focused so much on oscillator count that they missed the huge expansion in the oscillator function—morphing and number of waves. I think the Pro 2 only had 32 waveforms and you could only morph between the one before and after. Not that this is a Pro 2 mk II of course...
Waveformwise, PRO3 is a great step up yes... There were 3 waveforms in the PRO2 wavetables compared to 16 in PRO3.
And the analog oscillators also have a huge of variety as all waveforms has both a continuous shape knob and a Shape Mod knob... I do not know the resolution there, but if they are like with the digital oscillator, having 256 settings each, then the analog oscillators would give your 256*256 different tonal waveforms... That is huge!... Now add the possibilities in syncing them also and the number gets out of this world... Oh... And FM, AM etc ffom the mod matrix would make it even crazier.
I would say that PRO3 do not lack sonic variety for certain.
Yup lots of options there. The difference between steps on the VCOs won’t be as great as they are on the wavetable of course—but with some FM or AM or even some noise modulating the shape it definitely will sound different!
-
Ps. I am in no way hinting at you being dumb or anything, by writing TABLE and FORM in capital letters... It is only to make my rant easier to decipher as these two terms are being said over and over again, and it is so darn easy to mix them up :)
Thanks for pointing that out ;) Anyhow Ive seen pretty much all Pro 3 vids on youtube, and Dave often says 32 sets of 16 wave tables, so I thought, that sounds suspiciously high for a DSI/Sequential synth so I figured it be worth double checking. Anyhow, I'm def warming up to this one, but will hold out for the next announcement, as I'm more of a poly kind of person, hoping it will be a big brother kind of thing (Maybe something that does P6+OB6 and more). Although I've seen the light regarding how paraphonic modes can create alot of happy accidents and stuff to help the creative process. I kinda think a number of paraphonic modes should be an option on poly synths too as there are a couple of cool modes that all give their sound.
All the info I got on the wsvetables, I got from Paul Dither by asking, and he has got his hands on a PRO3, so I would assume the info to be correct, but you are right... Dave keep mixing the terms up in his interviews.
Regarding paraphonic mode, the cool thing for me is that each oscillator got its own VCA... That makes playing sounds a lot better... It is kind of like a hybrid para-polyphonic playing because if you let the vcf stay static, it will basically be 3 voice polyphonic because each oscillator has its own dedicated vca.
Personally i never thought anything good would come from having each osc play a different timbre, but there are a lot of fuzz about this since PRO3, so I will certainly try it out to see if it is any good for me.
-
Ps. I am in no way hinting at you being dumb or anything, by writing TABLE and FORM in capital letters... It is only to make my rant easier to decipher as these two terms are being said over and over again, and it is so darn easy to mix them up :)
Thanks for pointing that out ;) Anyhow Ive seen pretty much all Pro 3 vids on youtube, and Dave often says 32 sets of 16 wave tables, so I thought, that sounds suspiciously high for a DSI/Sequential synth so I figured it be worth double checking. Anyhow, I'm def warming up to this one, but will hold out for the next announcement, as I'm more of a poly kind of person, hoping it will be a big brother kind of thing (Maybe something that does P6+OB6 and more). Although I've seen the light regarding how paraphonic modes can create alot of happy accidents and stuff to help the creative process. I kinda think a number of paraphonic modes should be an option on poly synths too as there are a couple of cool modes that all give their sound.
And about the next thing... Do not think you need to wait, Dave said it was easier to make and for anlther type of musician, so I doubt we see a new poly flagship... More like a new eurorack module maybe or even a semi modular synth.
Also, I am normally a poly guy, but I realize tjat PRO3 is so unique that it will not be reasonable to make a poly equivalent... Three filters would be costly in say a 16 voice synth, even two is huge. Also there is a certain something about paraphonic playing you only geg from a paraphonic instrument that I kind of like a lot which is further alluring to me... And even if my genre which is ambient is mainly poly intensive, lots of elements do not need to be... Basses, berlin school sequences and arpeggios... Lead sounds and fx... A mono synth can be quite useful, especially when it is so deep as the PRO3 so that no poly simply doubles it in voicecount.
I do not think I will see any poly from Sequential that would make the PRO3 completely obsolete... In fact, Dave has a tendency to always create something new... Even the PRO2 is not obsolete because of the PRO3, it has a curtis filter, and four very different oscillators, and the filters can be routed... I think the only obsolete synth is the P8 since REV2.... Even aN Evolver still holds its own place today.
-
Ps. I am in no way hinting at you being dumb or anything, by writing TABLE and FORM in capital letters... It is only to make my rant easier to decipher as these two terms are being said over and over again, and it is so darn easy to mix them up :)
Thanks for pointing that out ;) Anyhow Ive seen pretty much all Pro 3 vids on youtube, and Dave often says 32 sets of 16 wave tables, so I thought, that sounds suspiciously high for a DSI/Sequential synth so I figured it be worth double checking. Anyhow, I'm def warming up to this one, but will hold out for the next announcement, as I'm more of a poly kind of person, hoping it will be a big brother kind of thing (Maybe something that does P6+OB6 and more). Although I've seen the light regarding how paraphonic modes can create alot of happy accidents and stuff to help the creative process. I kinda think a number of paraphonic modes should be an option on poly synths too as there are a couple of cool modes that all give their sound.
All the info I got on the wsvetables, I got from Paul Dither by asking, and he has got his hands on a PRO3, so I would assume the info to be correct, but you are right... Dave keep mixing the terms up in his interviews.
Regarding paraphonic mode, the cool thing for me is that each oscillator got its own VCA... That makes playing sounds a lot better... It is kind of like a hybrid para-polyphonic playing because if you let the vcf stay static, it will basically be 3 voice polyphonic because each oscillator has its own dedicated vca.
Personally i never thought anything good would come from having each osc play a different timbre, but there are a lot of fuzz about this since PRO3, so I will certainly try it out to see if it is any good for me.
I definitely dig different timbre per voice. The MonoPoly was the first synth I had that allows different waveforms for paraphonic playing. It cycles through VCO 1-4 and each can be a different shape. But the PolyEvolver took it to the next level for me because you could set the gated sequencer for a different wave per step and keystep through the waves. It should be useful in ambient context--even if applied subtly! I even like setting one oscillator at a higher octave just for some surprises.
-
In fact, Dave has a tendency to always create something new... Even the PRO2 is not obsolete because of the PRO3, it has a curtis filter, and four very different oscillators, and the filters can be routed... I think the only obsolete synth is the P8 since REV2.... Even aN Evolver still holds its own place today.
Pro 2 definitely doesn't have a Curtis filter in it. It should be a discrete 24db LPF SSM design with the second filter being the Oberheim SEM 12db SVF. And yes the filter-routing adds a lot of timbre´s since you can morph fluently between serial and parallel usage of the filters as well as how much of the signal is send to each filter (filter mix).
It feels like it will take years of dedication to outline every possible sonic option on this instrument.
Also you have 12 waveFORMS you can create sets of 3 with in any chosen order (does that make a short waveTABLE?)
In addition you have the superwaves of analog shapes and the waveforms which add to the feel of playing a multi-osc 4 voice poly.
I started out looking at the pro3 as a replacement or mk2, but am starting to realize they left out the most quirky parts.
Character Section and the custom effects via 4 delay lines with filters and panning each are another one.
I honestly think the Pro3 is much more sweetspot oriented and regarding the rising demand for synths (especially cheap-ass replicas) also more consumer-friendly while maintaining an not overwhelming but peculiar character.
-
In fact, Dave has a tendency to always create something new... Even the PRO2 is not obsolete because of the PRO3, it has a curtis filter, and four very different oscillators, and the filters can be routed... I think the only obsolete synth is the P8 since REV2.... Even aN Evolver still holds its own place today.
Pro 2 definitely doesn't have a Curtis filter in it. It should be a discrete 24db LPF SSM design with the second filter being the Oberheim SEM 12db SVF. And yes the filter-routing adds a lot of timbre´s since you can morph fluently between serial and parallel usage of the filters as well as how much of the signal is send to each filter (filter mix).
It feels like it will take years of dedication to outline every possible sonic option on this instrument.
Also you have 12 waveFORMS you can create sets of 3 with in any chosen order (does that make a short waveTABLE?)
In addition you have the superwaves of analog shapes and the waveforms which add to the feel of playing a multi-osc 4 voice poly.
I started out looking at the pro3 as a replacement or mk2, but am starting to realize they left out the most quirky parts.
Character Section and the custom effects via 4 delay lines with filters and panning each are another one.
I honestly think the Pro3 is much more sweetspot oriented and regarding the rising demand for synths (especially cheap-ass replicas) also more consumer-friendly while maintaining an not overwhelming but peculiar character.
Ahh... So in general they added a ladder filter and removed the routing options on PRO3... Yes... The two PROs certainly can live side by side which is typical of Daves synths... Each has something unique about them... Only the Prophet8 has become redundant because of the REV2.
The character section I will not miss, I found it clearly digital on the Prophet12... And yes, I would count 3 waveFORMS in a waveTABLE just that... A waveTABLE.. To me, a waveTABLE could be simply two waveFORMS, as long as you can morph between them... They would be kind of boring though.
To me, the sellingpoint of chosing PRO3 vs. PRO2 is most notably these things:
1. Analog oscillators
2. More versatile Wavetable osc.
3. The Ladder filter addition.
4. The more FX options
5. The enhanced sequencer
6. The analog filter drive and distortion
7. The better FATAR keybed
-
The ProPHET 12 does have Curtis filters by the way.
-
1. Analog oscillators
2. More versatile Wavetable osc.
3. The Ladder filter addition.
4. The more FX options
5. The enhanced sequencer
6. The analog filter drive and distortion
7. The better FATAR keybed
1. Agreed
2. Cannot judge yet, Superwaves, which are missing, are quite interesting for pads and drones (feels like having 48osc)
3. Sure, but there are already so many options in the auxilary filter department (Pedals, Eurorack)
4. More easily available yes, but not necessarily more optionwise (The 4 delays can have all their parameters addressed in the mod matrix and have 2 filters each, every known effect can be created)
5. ratcheting and 4 16step parts per preset, I agree (but why those buttons again? so unmusical if you compare them to KorgVolcas Sequencer Strip or those small RGB pads where you can just swipe over to select the steps to play)
6. Pro2 has Stereo Analog Distortion as a last step in the signal flow and the LPF has drive (boost) as well
7. Most probably a lot better, yeah
-
I have been wondering about something regarding the wavetable resolution, that I hope someone who had their hands on one could tell me:
The parameter ShapeMod supposedly have an 8 bit resolution since the range is from 0 to 255...but if that is max resolution, then slow modulation at small ranges would be rather stepped.
Is the internal resolusion for scanning a wavetable larger than 8 bit to smooth things out?... I know that filter cutoff usually has a larger internal resolusion when routing lfos or envelopes to filter cutoff... I would suspect the same with wavetable resolusion?
-
I have been wondering about something regarding the wavetable resolution, that I hope someone who had their hands on one could tell me:
The parameter ShapeMod supposedly have an 8 bit resolution since the range is from 0 to 255...but if that is max resolution, then slow modulation at small ranges would be rather stepped.
Is the internal resolusion for scanning a wavetable larger than 8 bit to smooth things out?... I know that filter cutoff usually has a larger internal resolusion when routing lfos or envelopes to filter cutoff... I would suspect the same with wavetable resolusion?
Was wondering that too. It did sound stepped in the NAMM demos where Dave was using the slider.
-
I have been wondering about something regarding the wavetable resolution, that I hope someone who had their hands on one could tell me:
The parameter ShapeMod supposedly have an 8 bit resolution since the range is from 0 to 255...but if that is max resolution, then slow modulation at small ranges would be rather stepped.
Is the internal resolusion for scanning a wavetable larger than 8 bit to smooth things out?... I know that filter cutoff usually has a larger internal resolusion when routing lfos or envelopes to filter cutoff... I would suspect the same with wavetable resolusion?
Was wondering that too. It did sound stepped in the NAMM demos where Dave was using the slider.
In the demo, he allocated the whole 256 steps to the slider (or rather maximum modulation amount), or turned the direct initial ShapeMod knob thru it's entire range... he did not scan just a little of the range there... so I think, that the stepping heard in the video is probably more related to the individual waves being different or something.
On the older Microwave synthesizers, Waldorf fixed this with a Smooth mode so you could decide for yourself if you wanted stepped or fine resolution... the Quantum also have this feature. Point is that if you for example want to use a wavetable's first two waveFORMS as the start and end point for modulation, then with only 256 values, you would essentially only have 15 interpolations between the two waveFORMS when you route, say, an LFO to the ShapeMod parameter via the matrix... with even middle speed of that LFO, you would no doubt get steps in the audio.
So I hope the resolusion of 256 is only in the initial parameter setting, just like it is with Cutoff Frequency for example... I hope that as soon as you start using ModWheel, Slider, Pitch Wheel, Aftertouch, LFO, EGs etc. that the resolution is a lot greater, otherwise it will not let you use the wavetables in more subtle modulations, especially when the range of the waveTABLE you scan is smaller than the full range.
But I would think that this has already been taken care of... I cannot think that Sequential did not see this as important... so unless they want to answer the question here, we'll just have to wait until I got my PRO3... then I'll make a test on it.
-
In the demo, he allocated the whole 256 steps to the slider (or rather maximum modulation amount), or turned the direct initial ShapeMod knob thru it's entire range... he did not scan just a little of the range there... so I think, that the stepping heard in the video is probably more related to the individual waves being different or something.
Ah that makes sense. Wasn’t sure what had already been programmed in the presets.
Mine arrives on the 19th so I can try it out then. It’s gonna be a long week!
-
The parameter ShapeMod supposedly have an 8 bit resolution since the range is from 0 to 255...but if that is max resolution, then slow modulation at small ranges would be rather stepped.
Is the internal resolusion for scanning a wavetable larger than 8 bit to smooth things out?... I know that filter cutoff usually has a larger internal resolusion when routing lfos or envelopes to filter cutoff... I would suspect the same with wavetable resolusion?
I test it with my Pro 3 (arrived yesterday, but not enough time until next Wednesday) and this is no problem. If you set the ShapeMod as a destination and the amount to a small number, all is very smooth. I test it with one slow rate lfo and with the touch stripe.
That much I can tell you: A wonderful sounding synthesizer with a very good workmanship (normal version)
-
Looking forward to hopefully trying one out tomorrow.