The Official Sequential/Oberheim Forum
OTHER DISCUSSIONS => General Synthesis => Other Hardware/Software => Topic started by: LoboLives on October 18, 2020, 02:08:22 PM
-
You knew it was coming ;)
So my goal for my setup is to use modern gear to mimic John Carpenter/Alan Howarth's setup they used to score Big Trouble In Little China. I think it is the ultimate synth set up in history.
Prophet-5 and Prophet-10 (w/Poly Sequencers)
ARP Avatar (x2) w/ARP Sequencer.
Emulator 1 and 2.
Prophet VS.
Prophet 2000.
Kurzweil K250.
Oberheim SEM Four Voice.
Linn LM1 and Linn Drum and EMU SP-12 for a monster percussion/drum ensemble.
Right now. I'm thinking this for my settup
Prophet-6 and possibly a Prophet REV 2-This is to mimic the Prophet 5 and Prophet 10. The Prophet 6 I already have but I'm still undecided about the REV2. While I would love to see Sequential follow up the Prophet 6 with a monster VCO synth...I don't think it will happen....so the REV2 (8 Voice) might just be the only compromise.
ARP Odyssey Desktops (x2)-Avatars were essentially Odysseys-I'm interested in getting the ARP edition of the Korg SQ-1 but it's missing one crucial feature...the ability to transpose the sequence with the external synth. I may actually get a Linnstrument and use the sequencer on that to control the Odysseys. (This will also allow me to use the Linnstrument to articulate the Prophet X's violin and fretless bass samples when doing orchestral work)
Sequential Prophet X and XL to mimic the Emulator 1 and 2. Why the X and XL? Because I'm so comfortable with the interface and architecture and while I would prefer a Prophet XS (desktop module) I know it's unlikely to happen and there is something about having two of these things going at once. Especially with one doing more percussion and rhythm oriented sounds while you play melodies and leads over top with the other. Plus playing piano/organ sounds on the XL feels excellent.
Prophet VS.-This is what I'm hoping Sequential's next synth brings. Not a reissue but a synth that has the same type of wavetable oscillators in the Pro 3. Perhaps something along the lines of the VCO/Wavetable oscillators type architecture (which will hopefully include the Prophet VS waveforms as well as some more complex wavetables/user wavetables that you can sweep) If this is the case, then perhaps I can tick off the Prophet 10/Prophet VS in one go with a single synth.
For the Prophet 2000. I suppose technically the Prophet X would be the appropriate synth to go for for this but as the PX and XL are taking up the Emulator duties, I might try and find a desktop type sampler...perhaps a Tasty Chips GR-1 or I might just skip this all together.
Now for the Kurzweil K250 there are a lot of excellent options from Kurzweil currently and I've had my eye on the PC4 but I would really like to see Kurzweil bring out a desktop or module version of their V.A.S.T. engine. Truth be told, I was actually looking at the desktop module from Dexibell. Yes it's a completely different sound/company but I think having an 88 key synth is going to prove a bit problematic real estate wise. I was thinking about just having the PC4 and Prophet X together as opposed to the Prophet X and Prophet XL but I actually feel I wouldn't utilizing the scope of the Kurzweil engine enough as opposed to the PX/XL engines.
I was aiming for the Oberheim Two Voice Pro to mimic the duties of the Oberheim SEM Four Voice (Which was mostly used as a bass synth) but that plan did not work out as everyone knows. I still might try and get a second hand one but from the second hand prices I'm seeing (close to $8-9K) I might just have to find an alternative.
For the Linn LM1 and Linn Drum and EMU SP-12 ensemble I have the Tempest and ISLA S2400 drum machines....I was leaning towards an Arturia DrumBrute to add to the mix as well...which is obviously nothing like any of the Carpenter/Howarth setup but it would give me some more variety.....that being said if Sequential do come out with a new drum machine or when Roger Linn comes out with his new drum machine...I'd take that over the DrumBrute obviously)
-
You knew it was coming ;)
So my goal for my setup is to use modern gear to mimic John Carpenter/Alan Howarth's setup they used to score Big Trouble In Little China. I think it is the ultimate synth set up in history.
Prophet-5 and Prophet-10 (w/Poly Sequencers)
ARP Avatar (x2) w/ARP Sequencer.
Emulator 1 and 2.
Prophet VS.
Prophet 2000.
Kurzweil K250.
Oberheim SEM Four Voice.
Linn LM1 and Linn Drum and EMU SP-12 for a monster percussion/drum ensemble.
First, it’s about time. Welcome!
A few observations...
— I don’t think the REV 2 is going to be a precise enough replacement for a Prophet 5/10. Maybe, depends on the sounds you have in your head. But it seems the Prophet 5 sound is one of the cornerstones of Carpenter’s work. If you’re wanting to save on costs, that’s probably not the place to do it.
The Arp / Linnstrument Combo would be killer.... especially since you play guitar and are familiar with the voicings. And aren’t the Arps with full size keys harder to find. I hate mini keys... if you don’t, don’t tell us. I don’t want to lose respect for you.
Sequential Prophet X and XL to mimic the Emulator 1 and 2.
.... solid.
For the Prophet VS... yeah, let's hope, but I have given up trying to guess Sequential's next move.
For the Prophet 2000.... you sometimes see these on Reverb, or find an Emulator on Reverb and let the Prophet X fulfill the duties of the Prophet 2000 and use the Emulator as.... itself.
The Kurzweil K2000, K2500 or PC3K6 would do nicely and are plentiful on Reverb.
The Oberheim TVS... well, you could get two (or 4) SEMs along with a Mutable Instruments Yarns (which would convert 4 voice MIDI data to four separate CV signals for the SEMs). Or a couple of Studio Electronics Boomstars might also do the trick. If you just planning to do bass, then two voices is plenty. If you’re looking a polyphonic pads, the price of putting together a four voice gets you into the territory of... brace yourself for a controversial statement... a Moog One which with its dual SVFs power voice, makes great Oberheim sounds.
Finally, LinnDrum samples would be really cool in a Prophet X... and for the price of a LinnDrum, you could get a *gasp* 3rd Prophet X.
I look forward to living through you vicariously in your quest to build this monster Setup..... it is clearly a young man’s task.
Good luck!
-
You knew it was coming ;)
So my goal for my setup is to use modern gear to mimic John Carpenter/Alan Howarth's setup they used to score Big Trouble In Little China. I think it is the ultimate synth set up in history.
Prophet-5 and Prophet-10 (w/Poly Sequencers)
ARP Avatar (x2) w/ARP Sequencer.
Emulator 1 and 2.
Prophet VS.
Prophet 2000.
Kurzweil K250.
Oberheim SEM Four Voice.
Linn LM1 and Linn Drum and EMU SP-12 for a monster percussion/drum ensemble.
First, it’s about time. Welcome!
A few observations...
— I don’t think the REV 2 is going to be a precise enough replacement for a Prophet 5/10. Maybe, depends on the sounds you have in your head. But it seems the Prophet 5 sound is one of the cornerstones of Carpenter’s work. If you’re wanting to save on costs, that’s probably not the place to do it.
The Arp / Linnstrument Combo would be killer.... especially since you play guitar and are familiar with the voicings. And aren’t the Arps with full size keys harder to find. I hate mini keys... if you don’t, don’t tell us. I don’t want to lose respect for you.
Sequential Prophet X and XL to mimic the Emulator 1 and 2.
.... solid.
For the Prophet VS... yeah, let's hope, but I have given up trying to guess Sequential's next move.
For the Prophet 2000.... you sometimes see these on Reverb, or find an Emulator on Reverb and let the Prophet X fulfill the duties of the Prophet 2000 and use the Emulator as.... itself.
The Kurzweil K2000, K2500 or PC3K6 would do nicely and are plentiful on Reverb.
The Oberheim TVS... well, you could get two (or 4) SEMs along with a Mutable Instruments Yarns (which would convert 4 voice MIDI data to four separate CV signals for the SEMs). Or a couple of Studio Electronics Boomstars might also do the trick. If you just planning to do bass, then two voices is plenty. If you’re looking a polyphonic pads, the price of putting together a four voice gets you into the territory of... brace yourself for a controversial statement... a Moog One which with its dual SVFs power voice, makes great Oberheim sounds.
Finally, LinnDrum samples would be really cool in a Prophet X... and for the price of a LinnDrum, you could get a *gasp* 3rd Prophet X.
I look forward to living through you vicariously in your quest to build this monster Setup..... it is clearly a young man’s task.
Good luck!
I wouldn’t want to get into buying vintage gear off of Reverb so any vintage Emu, Sequential or Kurzweil stuff is a no go. Theres just a lot less options in terms of sampler synths these days. I’m actually shocked Elektron haven’t developed a keyboard based sample synth.
The ARPs would just be the desktop modules so no keys involved.
-
Part of me still considers every now and then that I do listen to and am influenced by other composers other than John Carpenter. The more I listen to the Yamaha Montage the more I start to hear David Michael Frank’s scores for films like Code Of Silence or Alan Silvestri’s Synclavier scores like The Delta Force or even Jerry Goldsmith’s FM/Orchestral scores like Leviathan. With it’s newly implemented and easy to use song mode, external sequencing, advanced FM and wonderful sampled sounds it really is a versatile machine that might suit me better in the long run than sticking to my Carpenter setup. Still though the Kurzweil PC4 is also another contender as well. It’s incredibly similar to the Montage in terms of features but I’ve heard the sequencing is a bit cumbersome and completely linear based compared to the Montage which is based around “scenes” that you can arrange into a composition. It feels a lot more stimulating and intuitive. Even when composing Orchestral pieces, that workflow might actually be really beneficial. Even listening to composers like Ennio Morricone, Akira Ifukube, Ronald Stein, Nicholas Carras, James Bernard And Henry Mancini, the arrangements are actually very simple and could easily be approached with modern electronic gear. Even things like drum machines....they don’t need to be regulated to synthwave, EDM, techno, etc....why not jazz drums? Why not timpani or Orchestral percussions?
-
So you've done a 180 on touchscreens as well? ;D
-
So you've done a 180 on touchscreens as well? ;D
No it’s actually holding me back from the Montage to be honest.
-
So you've done a 180 on touchscreens as well? ;D
No it’s actually holding me back from the Montage to be honest.
Touchscreens can be a blessing or curse.
I think it mostly comes down to integration and how well the touchscreen is integrated into the OS — and hopefully what can be done on the touchscreen is duplicated (as much as possible) in the hardware in case the touchscreen fails.
The Waldorf Quantum was great at this. Not every parameter was duplicated with a knob, but it was pretty close.
At any rate, get thee to a music store and lay hands on a Montage first... you may find that the touchscreen is or isn’t a deal breaker one way or another. And I also admit, the Montage sounds superb if you are after this FM tones.
-
So you've done a 180 on touchscreens as well? ;D
No it’s actually holding me back from the Montage to be honest.
Touchscreens can be a blessing or curse.
I think it mostly comes down to integration and how well the touchscreen is integrated into the OS — and hopefully what can be done on the touchscreen is duplicated (as much as possible) in the hardware in case the touchscreen fails.
The Waldorf Quantum was great at this. Not every parameter was duplicated with a knob, but it was pretty close.
At any rate, get thee to a music store and lay hands on a Montage first... you may find that the touchscreen is or isn’t a deal breaker one way or another. And I also admit, the Montage sounds superb if you are after this FM tones.
I’ve played the Montage a few times and some of the Orchestral sounds are incredible as well as the FM tones. The floor model I played had some latency issues with the touch screen but you can still navigate around using the hardware buttons and knobs so it’s not too bad.
I also tried a PC4 as well and while it felt very plastic the sound was incredible and I was shocked at how easy it was to navigate.
-
I also tried a PC4 as well and while it felt very plastic the sound was incredible and I was shocked at how easy it was to navigate.
The Kurzweil UI and software are logical for sure. And VAST synthesis its powerful to say the least.
-
I also tried a PC4 as well and while it felt very plastic the sound was incredible and I was shocked at how easy it was to navigate.
The Kurzweil UI and software are logical for sure. And VAST synthesis its powerful to say the least.
The one thing I miss is they took out the arranger aspect of their sequencers and just went for pretty basic linear workstation sequencing. I'd have to really sit down with the PC4 to see if the sequencer is going to be intuitive or a headache.
-
I do like my Montage. It is slightly slower than the MODX changing from one performance to another but I assume that's down to the fact that it needs to set all the lighting on the knobs, buttons and sliders which the MODX doesn't. I prefer using the Montage than the MODX because of this and because the keybed feels a lotter better to me (Comparing Montage6 with MODX6)
I mainly bought these for the FM engine but I've got a couple of 'vintage' packs as well and enjoy those.
-
Just had another thought about the Montage touch screen. I have all screen animation effects turned off because it runs so much smoother and makes the whole user experience a lot better.
-
So I’ve done some reevaluating of my gear needs/desires.
Originally I was going to stick to my modernized Carpenter/Howarth set up but I realized it’s essentially chasing the dragon and a lot of the items I wanted originally would end up being used only sparingly on a few recordings here and there and with the headache of getting an Oberheim TVS I sat back and thought to myself, “Are Carpenter and Howarth my one and only synth influences? No.” There’s so many awesome synth based composers that inspire me and they also have different types of gear from Carpenter/Howarth. Why am I obsessed with trying to emulate this one set up when it’s essentially just a rabbit hole effect and eventually so much money and time will be spent trying to make excuses as to why something isn’t “good enough” rather than any musical effort into projects.
Do I go on the hunt for the dual ARP set up or do I get a Pro 3 which has much more flexibility, versatility and also memory and on-board effects? Nah, I’d much rather get the Pro 3 because not only can I emulate some of the Carpenter sequences, there’s also Tangerine Dream and Sylvester LaVey fast digital arpeggiator type tones with the Wavetable oscillator and Philian Bishop and Walter Sear dark Moog Mono synth type sounds as well as classic 70s style string machine tones from Italian composers like Stelvio Cirpiani.
In short, it’s not that I am opposed to getting more gear or becoming a minimalist but more just evaluating the gear I want to get and considering my application of them. How often will I use them? What am I using them for? Will they offer me a long term satisfaction? etc.
However, with the Prophet XL being discontinued...that is one item that I’m still conflicted on.
-
One of the great things about the Pro 3 is that it scales very nicely. If you just want to dial in a quick patch, Minimoog-style, it’s easy. But then you can really go deep, make a full track by playing the sequencer. Pro 3 makes easy things are easy, and hard things possible.
-
One of the great things about the Pro 3 is that it scales very nicely. If you just want to dial in a quick patch, Minimoog-style, it’s easy. But then you can really go deep, make a full track by playing the sequencer. Pro 3 makes easy things are easy, and hard things possible.
Absolutely. I do wish that the new morphing feature allowed for splits or a gradual morph across the keybed or somehow just isolate a single oscillator for one side of the split while the other two are dedicated to the sequencer/arp...much like the MatrixBrute....which is also another contender as well for me.
-
With the announcement of Oberheim's return, I do wonder if we might see the Two Voice Pro return as well. Perhaps even Tom's SonOfFourVoice concept. I would really hate for this all just to be for an OBX/a reissue and be done with it.
Should a TVS Pro or SO4V come to fruition....I might have to rethink my idea of getting a Pro 3 over the dual ARP Odyssey. It's super tempting but at the same time I'm hesitant.
-
With the announcement of Oberheim's return, I do wonder if we might see the Two Voice Pro return as well. Perhaps even Tom's SonOfFourVoice concept. I would really hate for this all just to be for an OBX/a reissue and be done with it.
Should a TVS Pro or SO4V come to fruition....I might have to rethink my idea of getting a Pro 3 over the dual ARP Odyssey. It's super tempting but at the same time I'm hesitant.
I've wondered about this as well -- since Tom doesn't seem to be mentioning even the possibility of taking orders for the Two Voice on his site, it makes one think that maybe Focusrite is swallowing up the brand altogether and maybe making both the TVS and OBX/a (and perhaps other reissues) available. Matrix 12 please.
-
With the announcement of Oberheim's return, I do wonder if we might see the Two Voice Pro return as well. Perhaps even Tom's SonOfFourVoice concept. I would really hate for this all just to be for an OBX/a reissue and be done with it.
Should a TVS Pro or SO4V come to fruition....I might have to rethink my idea of getting a Pro 3 over the dual ARP Odyssey. It's super tempting but at the same time I'm hesitant.
I've wondered about this as well -- since Tom doesn't seem to be mentioning even the possibility of taking orders for the Two Voice on his site, it makes one think that maybe Focusrite is swallowing up the brand altogether and maybe making both the TVS and OBX/a (and perhaps other reissues) available. Matrix 12 please.
This is why I think Focusrite is going to regulate Oberheim and Sequential to their "Golden Oldies" department while having Novation handle all the forward thinking and innovative synths. Shame really, even Tom said he wanted to do an updated version of the SEM and I was really hoping to see a VCO/Wavetable poly from Sequential but I think we are stuck with reissues. Not my bag but there's a market for it. Many people bought the Rossum SP1200 reissue over the ISLA S2400 just based on brand name alone and didn't even look at features or listened to any demos.
-
This is why I think Focusrite is going to regulate Oberheim and Sequential to their "Golden Oldies" department while having Novation handle all the forward thinking and innovative synths. Shame really, even Tom said he wanted to do an updated version of the SEM and I was really hoping to see a VCO/Wavetable poly from Sequential but I think we are stuck with reissues. Not my bag but there's a market for it. Many people bought the Rossum SP1200 reissue over the ISLA S2400 just based on brand name alone and didn't even look at features or listened to any demos.
I think that may be because there are at least a couple of different segments of buyers when it comes to vintage and vintage-inspired hardware products and reissues:
1) Those who are interested in "inspired-by" products, which attempt to take what was popular about the original and modify or improve it in some way.
2) Those who want to replicate the experience of the original hardware as much as possible, even to the extent of outright rejecting any incremental improvements that could be made.
As an analogy I'll use vintage cars... to some, owning a car from the 1960s or 70s would not be worthwhile or workable unless they put a modern stereo system in it, but others are going to be purists and would most appreciate (and be willing to pay a premium for) having the original working AM/FM radio in it.
Loosely mapping specific synth models to the two categories listed above, I would say the Prophet 6 is a type 1 product while the Prophet 5/10 is a type 2 product.
-
With the announcement of Oberheim's return, I do wonder if we might see the Two Voice Pro return as well. Perhaps even Tom's SonOfFourVoice concept. I would really hate for this all just to be for an OBX/a reissue and be done with it.
Should a TVS Pro or SO4V come to fruition....I might have to rethink my idea of getting a Pro 3 over the dual ARP Odyssey. It's super tempting but at the same time I'm hesitant.
I've wondered about this as well -- since Tom doesn't seem to be mentioning even the possibility of taking orders for the Two Voice on his site, it makes one think that maybe Focusrite is swallowing up the brand altogether and maybe making both the TVS and OBX/a (and perhaps other reissues) available. Matrix 12 please.
This is why I think Focusrite is going to regulate Oberheim and Sequential to their "Golden Oldies" department while having Novation handle all the forward thinking and innovative synths. Shame really, even Tom said he wanted to do an updated version of the SEM and I was really hoping to see a VCO/Wavetable poly from Sequential but I think we are stuck with reissues. Not my bag but there's a market for it. Many people bought the Rossum SP1200 reissue over the ISLA S2400 just based on brand name alone and didn't even look at features or listened to any demos.
I wouldn’t necessarily see that as a bad thing. A Matrix 12 done in the same way Dave re-did the Prophet 5/10? Yes, please! Some things just don’t need “improvements”… my humble 2¢
-
With the announcement of Oberheim's return, I do wonder if we might see the Two Voice Pro return as well. Perhaps even Tom's SonOfFourVoice concept. I would really hate for this all just to be for an OBX/a reissue and be done with it.
Should a TVS Pro or SO4V come to fruition....I might have to rethink my idea of getting a Pro 3 over the dual ARP Odyssey. It's super tempting but at the same time I'm hesitant.
I've wondered about this as well -- since Tom doesn't seem to be mentioning even the possibility of taking orders for the Two Voice on his site, it makes one think that maybe Focusrite is swallowing up the brand altogether and maybe making both the TVS and OBX/a (and perhaps other reissues) available. Matrix 12 please.
This is why I think Focusrite is going to regulate Oberheim and Sequential to their "Golden Oldies" department while having Novation handle all the forward thinking and innovative synths. Shame really, even Tom said he wanted to do an updated version of the SEM and I was really hoping to see a VCO/Wavetable poly from Sequential but I think we are stuck with reissues. Not my bag but there's a market for it. Many people bought the Rossum SP1200 reissue over the ISLA S2400 just based on brand name alone and didn't even look at features or listened to any demos.
I wouldn’t necessarily see that as a bad thing. A Matrix 12 done in the same way Dave re-did the Prophet 5/10? Yes, please! Some things just don’t need “improvements”… my humble 2¢
For sure. I just think it would be a waste of a brand to rely on “greatest hits” because there’s no longevity in that. Even Fender experiment with locking tuners, noiseless pickups, different shape necks etc. If they just stuck with V shaped necks and vintage hardware I’m sure it would cut a substantial portion of their customers
-
There's more to the re-issue fervor than merely nostalgia or the cheap thrill of owning an old classic synthesizer. There's also the desire to work with a simpler instrument free of menus and that allows a 100% direct experience of designing sounds and making music. It's the pleasure of dwelling for a whole session on the fundamentals of analog synthesis - which are rather basic; but that's where all the magic is. Some of us just don't need or want a plethora of features and even find them distracting; they also make a control panel annoyingly crowded. Personally, I don't care whether a synthesizer is a re-issued vintage or a brand-new design. But there certainly aren't many modern keyboard synthesizers that fit the above description, so the natural tendency is to look to the re-issues. For example, I would love to find the modern equivalent of something like a Roland SH-02, but with a four or five-octave keyboard. What a pleasure it would be to work with such a clean basic spacious panel. But there's no keyboard synthesizer available that comes even close. So, people like me end up looking to the re-issues. That's not nostalgia, it's a love of simplicity and directness in synthesis.
-
There's more to the re-issue fervor than merely nostalgia or the cheap thrill of owning an old classic synthesizer. There's also the desire to work with a simpler instrument free of menus and that allows a 100% direct experience of designing sounds and making music. It's the pleasure of dwelling for a whole session on the fundamentals of analog synthesis - which are rather basic; but that's where all the magic is. Some of us just don't need or want a plethora of features and even find them distracting; they also make a control panel annoyingly crowded. Personally, I don't care whether a synthesizer is a re-issued vintage or a brand-new design. But there certainly aren't many modern keyboard synthesizers that fit the above description, so the natural tendency is to look to the re-issues. For example, I would love to find the modern equivalent of something like a Roland SH-02, but with a four or five-octave keyboard. What a pleasure it would be to work with such a clean basic spacious panel. But there's no keyboard synthesizer available that comes even close. So, people like me end up looking to the re-issues. That's not nostalgia, it's a love of simplicity and directness in synthesis.
I understand all that, I just don’t believe it’s the case for most reissue buyers 90% of the time. As long as the buyers are honest with themselves and others why they enjoy the instrument then I have no problem. It’s when people try and preach or try and convince others is when I take an issue. Don’t tell me something “sounds better” when you also get a blind comparison test wrong and then proclaim the test was somehow rigged.
-
There's more to the re-issue fervor than merely nostalgia or the cheap thrill of owning an old classic synthesizer. There's also the desire to work with a simpler instrument free of menus and that allows a 100% direct experience of designing sounds and making music. It's the pleasure of dwelling for a whole session on the fundamentals of analog synthesis - which are rather basic; but that's where all the magic is. Some of us just don't need or want a plethora of features and even find them distracting; they also make a control panel annoyingly crowded. Personally, I don't care whether a synthesizer is a re-issued vintage or a brand-new design. But there certainly aren't many modern keyboard synthesizers that fit the above description, so the natural tendency is to look to the re-issues. For example, I would love to find the modern equivalent of something like a Roland SH-02, but with a four or five-octave keyboard. What a pleasure it would be to work with such a clean basic spacious panel. But there's no keyboard synthesizer available that comes even close. So, people like me end up looking to the re-issues. That's not nostalgia, it's a love of simplicity and directness in synthesis.
I understand all that, I just don’t believe it’s the case for most reissue buyers 90% of the time. As long as the buyers are honest with themselves and others why they enjoy the instrument then I have no problem. It’s when people try and preach or try and convince others is when I take an issue. Don’t tell me something “sounds better” when you also get a blind comparison test wrong and then proclaim the test was somehow rigged.
I agree. I couldn't care less about the whole blind test business. This has become almost a sport, with purists cheering from the bleachers and their opponents cursing back. But there's no need for all the heated blather. Throw all of it aside and just think and talk synthesis.
We all have our preferences. My preference is for simple analog with long keyboards, and I make no apologies for it. But what options are there for such a taste, other than the re-issues? And actually, I haven't found even a re-issue that fits my interests. The Korg ARP 2600 FS came the closest. But..um...$!
-
There's more to the re-issue fervor than merely nostalgia or the cheap thrill of owning an old classic synthesizer. There's also the desire to work with a simpler instrument free of menus and that allows a 100% direct experience of designing sounds and making music. It's the pleasure of dwelling for a whole session on the fundamentals of analog synthesis - which are rather basic; but that's where all the magic is. Some of us just don't need or want a plethora of features and even find them distracting; they also make a control panel annoyingly crowded. Personally, I don't care whether a synthesizer is a re-issued vintage or a brand-new design. But there certainly aren't many modern keyboard synthesizers that fit the above description, so the natural tendency is to look to the re-issues. For example, I would love to find the modern equivalent of something like a Roland SH-02, but with a four or five-octave keyboard. What a pleasure it would be to work with such a clean basic spacious panel. But there's no keyboard synthesizer available that comes even close. So, people like me end up looking to the re-issues. That's not nostalgia, it's a love of simplicity and directness in synthesis.
This is why I’m so attracted to the Waldorf Quantum. It has some traditional simplicity in the architecture (anyone who has ever spent any real time on a synth can get on with it quite quickly)… but it also pushes the envelope in some new directions (mixing kernel synthesis and granular / samples with VA and wavetables).
The Quantum has menus, of course. But the presentation of the menus is unobtrusive and complements an already familiar design. Moog did the same thing with the Moog One. “Geniusly Simple” integration in my opinion.
-
There's more to the re-issue fervor than merely nostalgia or the cheap thrill of owning an old classic synthesizer. There's also the desire to work with a simpler instrument free of menus and that allows a 100% direct experience of designing sounds and making music. It's the pleasure of dwelling for a whole session on the fundamentals of analog synthesis - which are rather basic; but that's where all the magic is. Some of us just don't need or want a plethora of features and even find them distracting; they also make a control panel annoyingly crowded. Personally, I don't care whether a synthesizer is a re-issued vintage or a brand-new design. But there certainly aren't many modern keyboard synthesizers that fit the above description, so the natural tendency is to look to the re-issues. For example, I would love to find the modern equivalent of something like a Roland SH-02, but with a four or five-octave keyboard. What a pleasure it would be to work with such a clean basic spacious panel. But there's no keyboard synthesizer available that comes even close. So, people like me end up looking to the re-issues. That's not nostalgia, it's a love of simplicity and directness in synthesis.
I understand all that, I just don’t believe it’s the case for most reissue buyers 90% of the time. As long as the buyers are honest with themselves and others why they enjoy the instrument then I have no problem. It’s when people try and preach or try and convince others is when I take an issue. Don’t tell me something “sounds better” when you also get a blind comparison test wrong and then proclaim the test was somehow rigged.
Yeah, you’re right… “blind tests” and “sounds better” don’t really end up being helpful at the end of the day (to me at least). A large part of my personal pleasure comes from not just the sound of the instrument, but my experience in creating with it.
-
There's more to the re-issue fervor than merely nostalgia or the cheap thrill of owning an old classic synthesizer. There's also the desire to work with a simpler instrument free of menus and that allows a 100% direct experience of designing sounds and making music. It's the pleasure of dwelling for a whole session on the fundamentals of analog synthesis - which are rather basic; but that's where all the magic is. Some of us just don't need or want a plethora of features and even find them distracting; they also make a control panel annoyingly crowded. Personally, I don't care whether a synthesizer is a re-issued vintage or a brand-new design. But there certainly aren't many modern keyboard synthesizers that fit the above description, so the natural tendency is to look to the re-issues. For example, I would love to find the modern equivalent of something like a Roland SH-02, but with a four or five-octave keyboard. What a pleasure it would be to work with such a clean basic spacious panel. But there's no keyboard synthesizer available that comes even close. So, people like me end up looking to the re-issues. That's not nostalgia, it's a love of simplicity and directness in synthesis.
This is why I’m so attracted to the Waldorf Quantum. It has some traditional simplicity in the architecture (anyone who has ever spent any real time on a synth can get on with it quite quickly)… but it also pushes the envelope in some new directions (mixing kernel synthesis and granular / samples with VA and wavetables).
The Quantum has menus, of course. But the presentation of the menus is unobtrusive and complements an already familiar design. Moog did the same thing with the Moog One. “Geniusly Simple” integration in my opinion.
I was really put off by the UNO Synth Pro’s matrix design but after watching Marc Doty’s videos he said it’s incredibly simple to use and once you get used to it, navigating is a breeze. It’s a 70s Style Italian synth but intelligently updated. I feel the same about the Quantum now. The only thing I dislike about the Quantum is the lack of multitimbrality whereas the PPG Wave had 10 part multitimbrality.
-
There's more to the re-issue fervor than merely nostalgia or the cheap thrill of owning an old classic synthesizer. There's also the desire to work with a simpler instrument free of menus and that allows a 100% direct experience of designing sounds and making music. It's the pleasure of dwelling for a whole session on the fundamentals of analog synthesis - which are rather basic; but that's where all the magic is. Some of us just don't need or want a plethora of features and even find them distracting; they also make a control panel annoyingly crowded. Personally, I don't care whether a synthesizer is a re-issued vintage or a brand-new design. But there certainly aren't many modern keyboard synthesizers that fit the above description, so the natural tendency is to look to the re-issues. For example, I would love to find the modern equivalent of something like a Roland SH-02, but with a four or five-octave keyboard. What a pleasure it would be to work with such a clean basic spacious panel. But there's no keyboard synthesizer available that comes even close. So, people like me end up looking to the re-issues. That's not nostalgia, it's a love of simplicity and directness in synthesis.
I understand all that, I just don’t believe it’s the case for most reissue buyers 90% of the time. As long as the buyers are honest with themselves and others why they enjoy the instrument then I have no problem. It’s when people try and preach or try and convince others is when I take an issue. Don’t tell me something “sounds better” when you also get a blind comparison test wrong and then proclaim the test was somehow rigged.
Yeah, you’re right… “blind tests” and “sounds better” don’t really end up being helpful at the end of the day (to me at least). A large part of my personal pleasure comes from not just the sound of the instrument, but my experience in creating with it.
At this point I’m really conflicted about again looking into getting synths without preset memory. Even if it doesn’t take that long to set a patch up, if I have a melody or something in my head, stopping to manually program a patch is going to be problematic.
I’m at a point where I’m like, do I go for the Pro 3 and get a kick ass monosynth, paraphonic synth, with effects and an incredibly advanced sequencer plus a Wavetable oscillator or do I do my original idea for the dual ARPs simply based on trying to mimic Carpenter’s setup.
-
At this point I’m really conflicted about again looking into getting synths without preset memory. Even if it doesn’t take that long to set a patch up, if I have a melody or something in my head, stopping to manually program a patch is going to be problematic.
I’m at a point where I’m like, do I go for the Pro 3 and get a kick ass monosynth, paraphonic synth, with effects and an incredibly advanced sequencer plus a Wavetable oscillator or do I do my original idea for the dual ARPs simply based on trying to mimic Carpenter’s setup.
After everything you've said here and elsewhere, how can you be conflicted? It seems clear as a digital bell to me that the Pro 3 is the right choice for you. Why limit yourself to the imitation of one guy's music? Besides, you can do both by using the Pro 3 as a controller of two modules.
-
I'm also looking at another sampler as well. Debating between the 1010Music Blackbox and the Tasty Chips-GR-1. They are completely different instruments and I'm mostly going to be loading EMU and Prophet 2000 samples in there.
I was considering the Pioneer SP-16 but I don't think you can play the samples polyphonically
-
You know with Dave's untimely passing, I might have to reconsider my thoughts on my set up after all and my thoughts towards reissues in general.
I just have to really decide if I'm basing my setup on practicality or on ego and would my OCD put me into a steep rabbit hole of wasting time chasing a dragon as opposed to composing/recording.
It's like constantly collecting records or movies but never actually taking the time to listen to/watch them all because you are always in hunting mode.
-
You know with Dave's untimely passing, I might have to reconsider my thoughts on my set up after all and my thoughts towards reissues in general.
How does Dave's passing affect that?
-
You know with Dave's untimely passing, I might have to reconsider my thoughts on my set up after all and my thoughts towards reissues in general.
How does Dave's passing affect that?
I know it sounds odd, and it's completely selfish of me to say so, but my late father was a huge fan of Dave Smith. He owned a Prophet 5 Rev 2 and after I saved up my money I got the Prophet 6 he was driving us back from the store and said "Ev, I'm going to tell you something, you have an instrument in your hands made by a man with integrity and passion and brilliance. It's not some cheap toy made in China or some plastic light bright shit that Akai or Roland are coming out with, this is a work of art." When we got home he sat with me and we went through the sounds and he was telling me about how he used similar sounds on his music and would play me tracks. And the Prophet X of course is a story in itself, I lost my job right after it was released and my father went out and bought it for me and we sat together on it for hours.
I know that if he were still around, we would have a Prophet 5 and OBX8 and he would be happy as a clam jamming away.
Dave Smith helped my father and I come closer together in a sense after many strained years. I know it sounds weird, but losing Dave feels like I've lost a memory of my father in a weird way. I dunno, maybe I'm dumb in saying that but it really has knocked the wind out of me.
-
Yeah, that's a good memory, and worth safeguarding. But it sounds like you might want to wait until the initial shock wears off before deciding on the direction of your studio.
-
You know with Dave's untimely passing, I might have to reconsider my thoughts on my set up after all and my thoughts towards reissues in general.
How does Dave's passing affect that?
I know it sounds odd, and it's completely selfish of me to say so, but my late father was a huge fan of Dave Smith. He owned a Prophet 5 Rev 2 and after I saved up my money I got the Prophet 6 he was driving us back from the store and said "Ev, I'm going to tell you something, you have an instrument in your hands made by a man with integrity and passion and brilliance. It's not some cheap toy made in China or some plastic light bright shit that Akai or Roland are coming out with, this is a work of art." When we got home he sat with me and we went through the sounds and he was telling me about how he used similar sounds on his music and would play me tracks. And the Prophet X of course is a story in itself, I lost my job right after it was released and my father went out and bought it for me and we sat together on it for hours.
I know that if he were still around, we would have a Prophet 5 and OBX8 and he would be happy as a clam jamming away.
Dave Smith helped my father and I come closer together in a sense after many strained years. I know it sounds weird, but losing Dave feels like I've lost a memory of my father in a weird way. I dunno, maybe I'm dumb in saying that but it really has knocked the wind out of me.
Those are precious and noble thoughts about your father. It seems as if the beauty and power of music helped to bring about a bit of a reconciliation between the two of you.
We're all feeling a bit winded right now, even several days after the news. I just had a fabulous hike through the local mountains; deep in the woods without seeing or hearing a single person for hours, and with my lunch on by back. It's as good as life gets for me. And yet, I still felt depressed thinking about Dave's death.
-
Yeah, that's a good memory, and worth safeguarding. But it sounds like you might want to wait until the initial shock wears off before deciding on the direction of your studio.
I guess another fear I have is for Sequential itself. What will become of the brand now that it's head figure is no longer with us and now that it's owned by a conglomerate. Could very well see "Made In China" on future synths or everything be merged into Novation or something. Dave said in one of his last interviews "Focusrite asked us 'What's your forecast' and we were like, we don't really have one. Cause we don't, it's just "what do we want to do next? It's more fun that way." But now that Dave isn't with us anymore, I can't see Focusrite accepting that as an answer. Obviously too early to have any basis for that but I still feel an urge to "Get it while it's still hot" out of fear of an uncertain future.
I know a new synth was scheduled for later this year....and I know it will be the last thing Dave's touch had.....I'm hopefully it's a VCO/Wavetable poly synth like a new Evolver....how poetic that would be that his last synth is the evolution (no pun intended) of one that helped him get back into hardware synths and form DSI.
But I don't even know if that's going to happen at all. Everything might be (and should be ) paused for Sequential for the foreseeable future.
-
In my humble opinion, I thought at the time that Dave oversaw the Focusrite deal with a mind to his future retirement so he would have done that with the future of sequential in mind. I also imagine that a lot of Dave's knowledge and ideas etc have been shared around amongst the existing Sequential staff.
Like has been said above, I fully understand your feelings at the moment, but it's a good thing to wait and see what progresses over the coming year or so.
-
Only just noticed that there's another Dave thread on these forums where people have said roughly what I've said above so apologies for that. I suppose it shows that more than one of us has the same thoughts about the Focusrite deal though :)
-
Yea, I'm not completely happy with my Pro 3.
Software/pots need(s) a LOT of help.
(Cheers Dave [RIP!] for the design and awesome Tone!! - But MAN is this thing is pissing me off!)
Please, Focusrite, re-write all software from the ground up!
Version 2.0! (The Pro 3 is already amazing, and could be the best mono synth ever created with the right OS update!)