The Official Sequential/Oberheim Forum
OTHER DISCUSSIONS => General Synthesis => Off Topic => Topic started by: Sacred Synthesis on November 18, 2015, 11:28:30 AM
-
This is the place to dream about what you'd like to see DSI make next.
Personally, I'm still awaiting "the big one," the sort of large-scale polyphonic bi-timbral synthesizer, strong in the fundamentals of synthesis but not loaded down with additional features, that would be a worthy replacement for the Prophet '08. In fact, the Prophet '08 is a great place to start. Add two more oscillators, a high pass filter, longer envelope times, possibly a few more voices, onboard delay, and I'd be in synthesizer paradise. I'm fine with eliminating the arpeggiator and sequencer, if that will help to reduce the price tag. Make this a real keyboard player's instrument.
I'm hoping DSI will some day make an instrument that will allow me to move on from either the Poly Evolver or the Prophet '08, something that doesn't suffer from the common modern ailments of thin-sounding oscillators or filters, too few voices, or too short a keyboard. And of course, make both keyboard and knobby module versions of the instrument. I'm still hoping.
-
I'd be with Razmo and would like to see something like an updated Wavestation/VS with Waldorf/PPG-like wavetables and the option to create your own wavetables as well as adding samples. Add the Evolver way of doing wave sequences (which I think slightly resembles the way the Animator is used in the Modal Electronics' 002 and 001) and lots of morphing options. Realtime recording of the vector stick movements for automation would be nice as well. The only analog components I'd like to see in such an instrument are the filters of the Pro 2 - at least there should be a state variable filter - and an analog distortion, as it works beautifully with a digital front end. Adding granular synthesis as an option would be nice as well. Basically, I would like to see a mainly digital synth that offers as many manipulation options as possible in order to work with wavetables and sample content, or - to word it differently - a synth that picks up on where parts of digital synthesis left in the 1990s. Make it multi-timbral and add four individual outs for each of the four extreme vector positions.
-
Well... I don't have to add my wishes I can see... pretty much agree with the above idear :)
but... not to be a spoilsport, but I either read or heard in a video, where Dave himself talked about how they come by new products, and he said that they go around the office talking about what they want to do next... and then the word "We do not do user base surveys here!" came along... so basicaly, they don't create what the users want, but what they want themselves, so I guess we can only "inspire" them here ;)
-
not to be a spoilsport, but I either read or heard in a video, where Dave himself talked about how they come by new products, and he said that they go around the office talking about what they want to do next... and then the word "We do not do user base surveys here!" came along... so basicaly, they don't create what the users want, but what they want themselves, so I guess we can only "inspire" them here ;)
I guess the users mostly start to come in when it's about firmware improvements (no matter how long that takes in the end). At least that's the field the support usually reacts very open to - at least in my experience.
As for basic design ideas: Yes, I imagine a lot of brainstorming to be going on. The ideas won't be coming out of nowhere though. It'll be in parts what Dave and his colleagues always wanted to do, current trends and developments in general (Eurorack, available types of synthesis, the status quo of current building parts, etc.), and maybe a bit of user feedback too. One doesn't necessarily have to perform strategic market research for that. Ideas can be triggered by just scanning through a couple of forums or comments, just as it happens in non-virtual environments and discussions.
My thought is just that you can only go so far with certain types of synthesis. The current flagships, the Prophet 12 and the Prophet-6, are pretty much perfect for what they are. You can't really add a whole lot in that direction without killing the according products or by making the prices go through the roof. So I would assume before we see (improved or extended) successors to those, we'd rather see DSI focussing on a new type of instrument and/or synthesis. They might still design a couple of offsprings (just like the Mopho has been to the Prophet '08) here and there to attract buyers that can't spend a fortune immediately.
-
I am probably going to repeat myself here but main wishes are:
- Compact desktop module with two/four/six voices.
- Four analog oscillators with variable shape, PWM and pairwise sync.
- Four digital oscillators with wavetables, user waveshapes and phase modulation with a (ratio, amount, feedback) type modulator.
- Audio rate CV calculation speeds means more CV operations makes sense such as adding a (function, argument) filter to the modulation slots with functions such as identity, linear/exponential slew and lowpass/bandpass/highpass filters.
- More than one noise modulation source for modulating with multiple out-of-phase filtered/slewed noises.
- A discrete state variable multi-mode filter similar to the combination of the filters in Modal Electronics 002/001 and 008 voice architectures complete with resonance color and filter feedback parameters.
- More than four lfos/envelopes and more than sixteen modulation slots.
- Pro 2 style sequencer or better.
- One voice per channel multi-timbral though sixteen channel dynamic voice assignment would be cool too.
- Prophet/Tetra style two sound layers.
- Prophet 12 style digital delays and tuned feedback.
What I am after is essentially a best-of-all-so-far kind of module. The Oberheim Xpander is a good starting point. In other words a module with a usable and minimal OLED display based user interface and very expressive voices inside.
Really like the idea of granular or sample oscillators too. Agree that strong fundamentals are essential.
-
My suggestion is really simple, and I think that it would solve the problem os many users.
Take a Prophet 12, kill two digital oscillators, add two P6-like VCOs and discreet filter for each voice, add PRO2's sequencer and CV options, add BBD delay emulation, 10 voices polyphony. That's it. I'd be glad to sell some stuff to pay for it. It's the master DSI Frankenstein!
A new mono with mixed features of what they already have would awesome too. A Pro2, less 1 digital oscillator, + 2 analog VCO (even 1 VCO + sub), a tweak to Pro2's filter. Great machine!
-
I'd really like something very similar to the PEK in case my PEK ever dies! No sequencer needed. More of a keyboard player synth as Sacred Synthesis had stated. Any ability to import waveforms more easily would be welcome.
-
I'd like to see something like a cross between the Pro 2 and Tetra. Small form factor, properly functioning multitimbral mode and no sequencer. I'd like to be able to use it as 4 monosynths, 1/3 voice split mode, or 4 voice poly mode. And software would be cool if it was made by LITERALLY anyone else but Soundtower.
If it had a more compact UI like the Prophet 12 Desktop I wouldn't mind. I would buy the hell out of that!
-
And software would be cool if it was made by LITERALLY anyone else but Soundtower.
Hehe! Me guess anyone can make unstable software if they want to do so. Making quality products for the price tags of editor software takes way more resources than the market wants to pay.
Agree on Tetra as being a good model for a future multi-timbral polyphonic DSI instrument.
-
Prophet T8000
Prophet T8 Keyboard Concept (weighted, wooden PolyAT, velocity, etc.) with all the best guts from the Prophet 08 (multiple LFO routing and modulation destinations), Prophet 6 (LP/HP Filter & Osc), Pro 2 (CV in/out and modulation - oh! make it bi-timbral with a Pro 2 section using split!) and might as well add a Prophet 12 section for layering, Prophet5/T8 envelopes...
I do believe I've given myself the vapors! ;D
-
I must say... I'd really like to see a studio-module, that sort of take the idear of multiple sounds of the Tempest, and puts them into this desktop module with pads.
I'm thinking about a device that has presets made up of 8 sounds (so that the sounds can be individualy controlled by it's own MIDI channel), each sound dedicated to a single pad.
Each sound should be digitaly generated a bit like the voice architecture of the P12, but with an added sample oscillator.
In general I see this as an externaly controlled percussion/FX module... one that is minded toward studio rats like me, that want total MIDI control. The reason I only wrote 8 pads is that I would like for each and every pad to have it's OWN individual voice, with the same filters as in the Pro 2 for ultimate sound sculpting control, and having more than eight such voices might be overkill in price... maybe even 6 voices could do the trick to keep price down.
The intention is to avoid voice allocations, and voice stealing... each pad on it's own voice, and having a seperate output in addition to a mixed main out.
the main use for it would be drums, percussion and FX sounds.
But I want to take the sampling into a rather different direction than the way samples is normaly handled.... I'd like for each Pad to have it's own short sample... maybe just 1 second of sound per pad, but it should be loopable... this inspire for creative use, but the fact that every sample should be short is because I want the sample TO BE PART OF THE PRESET! ... not some pool of samples stored in memory or the like... the sample must be part of the actual preset, and also be part of the SysEx structure of a voice.... with todays USB connection speed, it would not pose any problem driving a mere 44.100 samples along with a dump.... and the advantage is self explanatory... people would be much more inclined to make their own samples, you would be able to forget about sample banks when distributing your presets etc...
Such a device would be cool for percussion, FX, short samples and stuff like that... I'd REALLY like to see such a device...
-
But I want to take the sampling into a rather different direction than the way samples is normaly handled.... I'd like for each Pad to have it's own short sample... maybe just 1 second of sound per pad, but it should be loopable... this inspire for creative use, but the fact that every sample should be short is because I want the sample TO BE PART OF THE PRESET! ... not some pool of samples stored in memory or the like... the sample must be part of the actual preset, and also be part of the SysEx structure of a voice.... with todays USB connection speed, it would not pose any problem driving a mere 44.100 samples along with a dump.... and the advantage is self explanatory... people would be much more inclined to make their own samples, you would be able to forget about sample banks when distributing your presets etc...
Such a device would be cool for percussion, FX, short samples and stuff like that... I'd REALLY like to see such a device...
What do you think about Ableton's Push 2?
-
But I want to take the sampling into a rather different direction than the way samples is normaly handled.... I'd like for each Pad to have it's own short sample... maybe just 1 second of sound per pad, but it should be loopable... this inspire for creative use, but the fact that every sample should be short is because I want the sample TO BE PART OF THE PRESET! ... not some pool of samples stored in memory or the like... the sample must be part of the actual preset, and also be part of the SysEx structure of a voice.... with todays USB connection speed, it would not pose any problem driving a mere 44.100 samples along with a dump.... and the advantage is self explanatory... people would be much more inclined to make their own samples, you would be able to forget about sample banks when distributing your presets etc...
Such a device would be cool for percussion, FX, short samples and stuff like that... I'd REALLY like to see such a device...
What do you think about Ableton's Push 2?
I'm having problems figuring out if this is just a front end for computer software, or a selfcontained instrument? ... if it's self contained it's interresting... if not I have no interrest in it, since I do not use computer softsynths, and don't want to :)
But with that said... it still lack what I want... integration af samples into presets in the MIDI, and probably most important; the analog part of the voice...
Don'r get me wrong, the Push2 is probably REALLY cool for many people, but what I'm looking for is a bit different.
Basicaly what I want is just a new Tempest minded for studio use, but with the voice architecture of the PRO 2 and added user sample capabilities at preset level... probably never going to happen though... but that's what I'd like to see.
-
I'm having problems figuring out if this is just a front end for computer software, or a selfcontained instrument? ... if it's self contained it's interresting... if not I have no interrest in it, since I do not use computer softsynths, and don't want to :)
But with that said... it still lack what I want... integration af samples into presets in the MIDI, and probably most important; the analog part of the voice...
Don'r get me wrong, the Push2 is probably REALLY cool for many people, but what I'm looking for is a bit different.
Basicaly what I want is just a new Tempest minded for studio use, but with the voice architecture of the PRO 2 and added user sample capabilities at preset level... probably never going to happen though... but that's what I'd like to see.
Gotcha. Well, the Push controller is of course not self-contained, but only working in conjunction with Ableton Live. Basically, I'm only addressing Ableton's Sampler "Simpler" and how it is integrated into Push 2. There's a slicing function that lets you automatically map parts of one sample to the pads (depending on the resolution). That's why I brought up the question. I don't own the Push 2 controller, but have tested one at an Ableton event and I have to say that the workflow is pretty amazing. One of the coolest devices I can currently think of when it comes to working with samples. No need for soft synths. All the other aspects are not covered the way you'd like them to be, though. It was just an idea, because Push 2 makes the processing of samples a really tactile experience.
-
I'm having problems figuring out if this is just a front end for computer software, or a selfcontained instrument? ... if it's self contained it's interresting... if not I have no interrest in it, since I do not use computer softsynths, and don't want to :)
But with that said... it still lack what I want... integration af samples into presets in the MIDI, and probably most important; the analog part of the voice...
Don'r get me wrong, the Push2 is probably REALLY cool for many people, but what I'm looking for is a bit different.
Basicaly what I want is just a new Tempest minded for studio use, but with the voice architecture of the PRO 2 and added user sample capabilities at preset level... probably never going to happen though... but that's what I'd like to see.
Gotcha. Well, the Push controller is of course not self-contained, but only working in conjunction with Ableton Live. Basically, I'm only addressing Ableton's Sampler "Simpler" and how it is integrated into Push 2. There's a slicing function that lets you automatically map parts of one sample to the pads (depending on the resolution). That's why I brought up the question. I don't own the Push 2 controller, but have tested one at an Ableton event and I have to say that the workflow is pretty amazing. One of the coolest devices I can currently think of when it comes to working with samples. No need for soft synths. All the other aspects are not covered the way you'd like them to be, though. It was just an idea, because Push 2 makes the processing of samples a really tactile experience.
I can certainly see the advantage of Push2 ... It reminds me a bit of all the other sample grooveboxes... and NI Machine and a lot of AKAI stuff...
In essence... seen from a performance view, what I want to accomplish is using a device with preferably 8-16 pads for triggering sound FX made with real synthesis (hence the Pro2 architecture), but with added sample abilities for more flexibility in firing off sounds that are too complex to handle with synthesis (accoustic stuff etc. like percussion and looped snippets of sounds like rain, fire, water running and other looped textures) ... but I want to sculpt these sounds with analog filters and VCA....
I often see electronic musicians that play live, have some sort af device available with pads, that they use to fire off sound FX in a performance... usualy it's just some sample playback device... I'd just like to expand on that with a synth engine per pad, and some pressure sensitivity to the pads, to make the sounds more adjustable in real time for less static sound.
Basicaly the Tempest is such a device... it's just way too convoluted in it's interface, it shares sounds with few voices, it has terrible MIDI communication features and generaly have way too many features (all the sequencing stuff could easily be left out!)... I'd like it more simple, better integrated with a studio (MIDI).
-
In essence... seen from a performance view, what I want to accomplish is using a device with preferably 8-16 pads for triggering sound FX made with real synthesis (hence the Pro2 architecture), but with added sample abilities for more flexibility in firing off sounds that are too complex to handle with synthesis (accoustic stuff etc. like percussion and looped snippets of sounds like rain, fire, water running and other looped textures) ... but I want to sculpt these sounds with analog filters and VCA....
I often see electronic musicians that play live, have some sort af device available with pads, that they use to fire off sound FX in a performance... usualy it's just some sample playback device... I'd just like to expand on that with a synth engine per pad, and some pressure sensitivity to the pads, to make the sounds more adjustable in real time for less static sound.
Basicaly the Tempest is such a device... it's just way too convoluted in it's interface, it shares sounds with few voices, it has terrible MIDI communication features and generaly have way too many features (all the sequencing stuff could easily be left out!)... I'd like it more simple, better integrated with a studio (MIDI).
Adjusting individual pressure sensivities per pad (as well as individual settings for envelopes, filters, etc.) is possible with Push 2 - and pretty quickly too.
So I guess you basically want a Push 2 as a self-contained box with analog filters and enhanced MIDI functionality.
-
Prophet T8000
Prophet T8 Keyboard Concept (weighted, wooden PolyAT, velocity, etc.) with all the best guts from the Prophet 08 (multiple LFO routing and modulation destinations), Prophet 6 (LP/HP Filter & Osc), Pro 2 (CV in/out and modulation - oh! make it bi-timbral with a Pro 2 section using split!) and might as well add a Prophet 12 section for layering, Prophet5/T8 envelopes...
I do believe I've given myself the vapors! ;D
That keybed was awesome. But with all of the non-traditional controllers out there, do you think it's really worth the time and effort to incorporate a hammer-action keybed in a high-performance synth? I'd rather have a long-throw (TP 60-style) Fatar organ keybed, which would get closer to the T8 throw (even if the sensors might not be as sophisticated, and, lacking poly aftertouch).
-
I know this is totally out of left field, but I've been hoping to see a synth that combines the ergonomics of a lot of the classic subtractive synths but uses some different, much less common, forms of synthesis.
For example, DSI seem to have been adding some BBD's to their most recent synthesizers. I think it would be absolutely amazing if a four-voice Karplus-Strong synthesizer was developed out of this with excellent tracking. The 'character' section in conjunction with numerous envelopes would be an amazing addition to this. I imagine a dedicated, or set of dedicated character envelopes would be beneficial to this section as well. Of course a couple of analog oscillators would help tremendously with designing sounds as well as with appealing to a wider audience. Of course multiple noise-sources would be necessary for this kind of synthesis. They could call it the Pro KS!
Out of this, all kinds of products, including a 1V/O BBD Eurorack module could be introduced ;)
One can always dream I suppose...
-
One thing that I would love to see in a flagship keyboard is a better keybed, e.g., Fatar TP/8S (Waldorf Wave, Access Virus, Kawai K5000s, and, uh, John Bowen's Solaris) rather then the TP/9S currently used (and quite popular, also used in my Waldorf Q).
I'm not sure that a 76-key model makes commercial sense (in spite of the additional panel space), except in pricey, custom models (as Waldorf did with the Wave, as an option) - so 61-key beds would be perfectly fine.
Poly aftertouch would be an entirely different proposition and would likely require a different approach to the chassis (read: heavier).
-
I would like to see a drummachine meant for studio use via a DAW... Preferably something that is expandable.
I'm thinking a kind of desktop module, with a single pad on it for triggering the sound, and a small display above it, and a few single knobs for data entry and editing, to keep it minimal... and then some smart way of "clicking" one such device onto the side of the next, letting you chain up to 16 of them (one for each MIDI channel).
The point is that a single unit should be relatively cost effective, being a single drumvoice in itself, but allow for more voices as needed. This way you could do with just one box, if you're the layer recording type of musician, or more if you're the live performance type of musician... a win-win for everyone... even the poor musician who can get access to the technology without breaking the bank, but eventualy add on it when the funds are there.
I imagine the engine being something like this:
One oscillator from the P6 (or another design, it just needs to be STABLE! with a huge pitch range and ability to reset it's phase at note-on, preferably even choosing the degree to start at for full control of the "click" in the transient).
One Pro2 digital oscillator complete with character section.
One sample oscillator with access to some form of user sample memory. (must have both single-shot, and looped sample capabilities)
Now follow these three oscillators with the Pro2's dual filters... and make the oscillators individualy routable to these two filters, or around them, so that you can decide exacly what oscillators goes thru them.
Now follow the dual filters with an analog distortion circuit, where you again can route the output of the two filters into, or around the distortion curcuit as you see fit.
Finish the signal path with the FX block of the P6, with the ability to feed it from both right after the distortion curcuit, but also from the direct output of the two digital oscillators (these would be in the digital domain at that point anyway, so no need for DACs).
Make sure that the audio rate mod-matrix can modulate between both the Pro2 oscillator and the sample oscillator for many more sonic options. Also make a single ADC path along the analog signal path to allow for feedback.
Make the whole thing playable as a synth as well, adding polyphony as you add more modules.
Keep the price approx. at what the Mopho Desktop was... some corners may have to be cut, I don't know, but something like that :)
Point is... I really want a single drumvoice device, tailored for drum synthesis, with both analog and digital capabilities and added sampled percussion feature... but coupled with analog filters and distortion (filters must be capable of both LP, BP and HP, and each oscillator be routable to these for added flexibility).. topped with digital FX is important too... Envelopes must be fast, and have dedicated curve parameters to allow for precise adjustment of the response curves.. .this is CRUCIAL! ... the reason for the routable oscillators is that to make convincing snares and other percussive sounds, you have to have control over at least two elements of the sound... Snares for example has a "skin" sound, and a "noise" sound that needs to be shaped individualy.
-
I agree with you on many of the points, Razmo.
The idea of having some kind of user loadable sample playback with pre/post filter choice/mix in a voice architecture would be very cool. Same with percussion features like fast envelope times, envelope shaping and attack/decay mode. However I would rather like this to be part of a general voice architecture like seen on Tempest that can be use for multiple purposes. That studio multi-tool.
My guess is that the component price and board size of the Pro 2 filters are way higher than a Mopho module so doubt such a module would be affordable. Also I like the idea of extension modules but doubt it will be cheaper than the current module and polychain concept in DSI modules.
So how about a desktop module with percussion and sample features? ;)
Having it in form of a multi-timbral module without any keys on allows for more compact size and free choice of controller to use such expressive workhorses like QuNeo (http://www.keithmcmillen.com/products/quneo/) or QuNexus (http://www.keithmcmillen.com/products/qunexus/). Such controllers allows for more degrees of freedom than the standard row of black and white on/off switches.
I must say that I like your idea of analog/hybrid percussion synthesizers operated from a pad controller. My guess is that you will soon regret that you sold your Pulse 2 and possibly MBase11/MBrane11!
-
I agree with you on many of the points, Razmo.
The idea of having some kind of user loadable sample playback with pre/post filter choice/mix in a voice architecture would be very cool. Same with percussion features like fast envelope times, envelope shaping and attack/decay mode. However I would rather like this to be part of a general voice architecture like seen on Tempest that can be use for multiple purposes. That studio multi-tool.
My guess is that the component price and board size of the Pro 2 filters are way higher than a Mopho module so doubt such a module would be affordable. Also I like the idea of extension modules but doubt it will be cheaper than the current module and polychain concept in DSI modules.
So how about a desktop module with percussion and sample features? ;)
Having it in form of a multi-timbral module without any keys on allows for more compact size and free choice of controller to use such expressive workhorses like QuNeo (http://www.keithmcmillen.com/products/quneo/) or QuNexus (http://www.keithmcmillen.com/products/qunexus/). Such controllers allows for more degrees of freedom than the standard row of black and white on/off switches.
I must say that I like your idea of analog/hybrid percussion synthesizers operated from a pad controller. My guess is that you will soon regret that you sold your Pulse 2 and possibly MBase11/MBrane11!
I agree that some of the idears I have may be either too circumstancial, or expensive, but it will have to be specificaly tailoreed for percussion synthesis, otherwise you could just use a normal synth like Evolver or even Mopho for this, but those are not optimal in my opinion.
The main idear was to have a single drumvoice in a single unit really... Personaly I'd be happy even with a device that had no physical controls at all, so that all control and editing would be via an editor, but I don't think that many others would want it that simple, so I'd let the interface be up to DSI.
I would not want to give up on the dual filters to be honest, and the flexible routing because that will be a crucial part of the sound design options.. Maybe I'd even say that I'd like something new there, like four individual filters that could be used at the same time... a LP, HP and BP, individualy routable to the oscillators... If you wanted to forget about routing the oscilltors into filters, I'd be happy with three SEM type multimode filters, one hardwired for each oscillator... the point is, that I see the three oscillators as three distinct sound parts of a single drumsound, and each would need to be sculpted differently... I'd also like the engine to have dedicated envelopes for each oscillator's/filters parameters... throw in an analog distortion at the end... maybe even one for each oscillator, and finish it off with the P6 FX section, but with new FX tailored for percussion sound, and make it possible to control the routing of the FX as either serial or parallel, so that it can be used both as ambience (echo and reverb), but also insert FX (distortion, compressor, EQ etc.).
You could even diminish the engine, by only having one analog oscillator, and one multi-functional digital oscillator, that can work as both the ordinary Pro2 oscillator, but be switched into using samples... that may even be smarter... especialy if you decided to leave out the analog oscillator and made the front end 100% digital... in that case two such digital oscillators could give some nice options (but I know DSLSYNTH, that you'll be grinding your teeth at leaving the analog oscillator out :D ). In my opinion though, an analog oscillator may not really be needed, if the digital ones have been tailored for consistency etc... in fact I think I'll prefer that to any unstable analog oscillator.
The Character sectioncould also be expanded... I can see many fun digital mangling parameters being added on an oscillator basis, in addition to the mod matrix audio rate modulation.
More or less, it could be a synth as well... would not mind, as long as the engine is made for individual control of the oscillators... maybe the Pro2 architecture is even close to what I could use for this... maybe I'm just still dreaming of the Pro2 engine in a small desktop device...
-
I would not want to give up on the dual filters to be honest, and the flexible routing because that will be a crucial part of the sound design options.. Maybe I'd even say that I'd like something new there, like four individual filters that could be used at the same time... a LP, HP and BP, individualy routable to the oscillators...
Sounds like simpler voices and layers could do the same. One filter per voice but the ability to stack multiple voices. More distributed sound design of cause but its doable. Like your idea of a next generation percussion voice and user samples. Would like to see that happen. Only trouble with the two Pro 2 filters is that $1K voice price.
-
I would not want to give up on the dual filters to be honest, and the flexible routing because that will be a crucial part of the sound design options.. Maybe I'd even say that I'd like something new there, like four individual filters that could be used at the same time... a LP, HP and BP, individualy routable to the oscillators...
Sounds like simpler voices and layers could do the same. One filter per voice but the ability to stack multiple voices. More distributed sound design of cause but its doable. Like your idea of a next generation percussion voice and user samples. Would like to see that happen. Only trouble with the two Pro 2 filters is that $1K voice price.
The main point of the architecture is, that to create, say; a snare... you'd need to create the skin tone of at least two oscillators, and preferably have an analog LPF to shape it off... but you'd need a separate VCA to sculpt it's length as well separately from the noise part, that will be made from another oscillator, and this "layer" has to be capable of running thru a HPF with resonance to shape the noise-part... it must also have it's own VCA since this part usualy is longer than the skin part...
Like the above, each and every typpical percussion sound is usualy build up of independant part, that require some flexibility in routing options etc. that few synth engines give you currently... this is why a sound needs to be build up of several parts... if you made a single voice architecture, where you have to sort of like have 2-3 full voices for each sound it'll be expensive... but how ould you circumvent this? ... You could leave some of the sculpting to digital control... say; create the individual filters for each oscillator as digital ones.... for example a multimode digital filter for each oscillator... lets just say three of those, with each it's own multimode filter, Character section, Amplifier etc. all made in digital... then fire those three together thru an analog LPF and HPF, both with resonance, and then into an analog distortion, and lastly that FX engine at the end.
That would allow you to pair the LPF/HPF into a BPF...
But this architecture is pretty close to what the Pro2 is anyway... each oscillator has it's own digital VCA... but it could be expanded upon to make the oscillators even more separate, like with the idears I gave above...
-
Do you need more than two parts?
Could a digital filter or noise color parameter with a pre/post filter setting do the job?
I do get the idea for multiple parts of the sound and are just wondering what the best DSI-like voice architecture being able to express such sounds would look like in order to keep the expressiveness high and the price as low as possible. Not to mention that there are many other sounds possible in such an architecture and one wants to leave room for a certain degree of expressiveness here too. Speaking of percussion sounds I am really curious what digital effects the original Dave/Roger drum voice had. Could be interesting to see in a new voice type.
For instance by inserting the digital oscillators in post filter mode together with the delay mix-in point would greatly save D/A converters as these are needed anyway. A modulation slot could route the VCA envelope value to the noise level or the noise level could be controlled with a separate envelope.
-
Do you need more than two parts?
Could a digital filter or noise color parameter with a pre/post filter setting do the job?
I do get the idea for multiple parts of the sound and are just wondering what the best DSI-like voice architecture being able to express such sounds would look like in order to keep the expressiveness high and the price as low as possible. Not to mention that there are many other sounds possible in such an architecture and one wants to leave room for a certain degree of expressiveness here too. Speaking of percussion sounds I am really curious what digital effects the original Dave/Roger drum voice had. Could be interesting to see in a new voice type.
For instance by inserting the digital oscillators in post filter mode together with the delay mix-in point would greatly save D/A converters as these are needed anyway. A modulation slot could route the VCA envelope value to the noise level or the noise level could be controlled with a separate envelope.
More than two parts?... that depends on what you have avaiable as oscillatos I guess... a simple skin hit tone, will require at least two detuned oscillators alone, and would need a third to introduce the noise part... so if the supersaw technique was expanded to allow very large detunings, then one oscillator could probably serve as the skin part.
But then look at how the old TR-808 did it's hihats... a combi of 6 inharmonicaly detuned pulse waveforms is used in that... this would require a superpulse waveform with capabilities of detuning in a random fashion.
There are many forms of drum synthesis, and I'm sure you would not be able to catch them all, and that there are other ways to create convinving hihats without using 6 pulse oscillators, you'd just have to make the engine as flexible as possible, but I think that the Pro2 architecture looks pretty good for this allready, and only need a few twists to get better.
Regarding noise parts... to be able to give the noise a good sound, you'd need resonanse... the resonance is alfa omega here to make the noise part cut thru... without resonance, no claps is possible really, or good snares that does not sound like simple hipass filtered noise... on the TR-808, you even had the noise filtered in two separate paths to allow for more thump in the transient.
So it's probably hard to create a voie architecture that will allow for everything... but that's not really needed either... as long as the most basic sound sculptning possibilities are there.... the more colkours the oscillators themselves can do, the better, the more individual they are, the better, you need at least a multimode filter with resonance and an analog distortion is essential for kick drums as well as other sounds... the sample oscillators are needed for realistic cymbals as these are practicaly impossible to do with synthesis.
-
I see what you mean, Razmo! So two analog filters would indeed be useful. So would layers be as that is another way to get two filters but only when needed though voice management would be more complex.
Two filters with a Pro 2 style cross fader between them and sample playback oscillators? Sounds tasty! Wonder if a Curtis chip filter and a discrete state variable filter would be a good idea? Could be more compact and possibly cheaper than the Pro 2 filters.
Would love to see a general purpose voice architecture with a few extra features for better percussion sounds rather than specialized voices. Unless of cause its next generation TR-808 style voices like the ones provided by Jomox and Elektron et al but with much more thought out integration of analog and digital parts.
Speaking of claps on the Evolver one could use the single step sequence trick to get separate filter settings for each of the two filters. Could be interesting to see how well that performs in practice.
-
I would like to see something with Fractal Waveforms . . .
-
Since this might end up being an endless discussion not bound to a particular NAMM event, I've turned this topic into a sticky topic in case DSI/Sequential are looking for inspiration. ;D
-
I've turned this topic into a sticky topic in case DSI/Sequential are looking for inspiration. ;D
Would be lovely if DSI can feel just a little inspired by our dreams but of cause we have to listen to DSI (https://twitter.com/dsiSequential/status/559271256092971009) too.
. o O ( :o )
-
It would be interesting to see a synthesizer that had the option to run the raw waveforms through an analog phaser or distortion before it went to the analog filters and even the envelopes. That way it would retain a punchy attack with harmonically rich variations.
-
This is the place to dream about what you'd like to see DSI make next.
I want DSI to respond directly to the Sub37 with a 37-key monosynth with architecture similar to the Prophet 6, in the $1500 USD range. That would be fun, and I'd probably start saving up right away.
-
This is the place to dream about what you'd like to see DSI make next.
I want DSI to respond directly to the Sub37 with a 37-key monosynth with architecture similar to the Prophet 6, in the $1500 USD range. That would be fun, and I'd probably start saving up right away.
That's quite possible if there's going to be a monophonic little brother of the Prophet-6. In a way, I always perceived the Prophet-6 to be a brilliant response to the Sub 37, just in the form of a polyphonic synth. Conceptually or philosophically both are pretty close - at least with regard to the immediacy both offer.
-
I want DSI to respond directly to the Sub37 with a 37-key monosynth with architecture similar to the Prophet 6, in the $1500 USD range. That would be fun, and I'd probably start saving up right away.
That's quite possible if there's going to be a monophonic little brother of the Prophet-6. In a way, I always perceived the Prophet-6 to be a brilliant response to the Sub 37, just in the form of a polyphonic synth. Conceptually or philosophically both are pretty close - at least with regard to the immediacy both offer.
Well said, that makes sense. Given DSI's past pattern, a new monosynth seems natural; but it's possible that DSI/Sequential has decided that polyphony is their ground, and they may demur on the monosynth market. Dave Smith himself said at one point* that anybody can do an inexpensive monosynth with a decent sound, but polyphony is hard.
So I would totally understand if we don't see a monosynth from DSI. If that's the case, I'm still perfectly happy with my Little Phatty/Evolver combo.
_________________
* Sorry, I couldn't find the video link.
-
There have to be future Sequential instruments, and a small monophonic/duophonic/paraphonic would be the most natural choice at this point. Or perhaps something resembling the Tetra. If Dave goes in the opposite direction - bigger - then he'll very quickly surpass the P12 as the most expensive and the flagship of the line. That's not impossible, but I think it's unlikely. I say we'll see a small Sequential instrument sooner or later.
-
In such a case they hope they make it a Prophet-2 instead in order to allow for filters in stereo configuration. Hopefully with more modulation features and layers!
. o O ( same old rant )
-
I wonder if Dave will ever design an instrument larger than the Prophet 12.
-
You know what? I really think the good old Rhodes keyboards need some competition: Prophet 16.
Of cause that requires discrete electronics voices and a complex voice to make it interesting not to mention heavy!
;)
-
You know what? I really think the good old Rhodes keyboards need some competition: Prophet 16.
Of cause that requires discrete electronics voices and a complex voice to make it interesting not to mention heavy!
;)
You mean an instrument with a Rhodes keyboard?
-
Or something like this?
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qUpy68eyPsA/VKd1RlLtZ9I/AAAAAAAJOXI/D4s8CNsFzAE/s1600/9760_SequentialCircuits_ProphetT8.jpg)
-
I mean a synthesizer with plenty of analog discrete electronics voice boards. Could be quite heavy hence the Rhodes comparison. Second guess is the right one.
-
I thought something that could replace the Rhodes Chroma https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDbz-1RBLmU
That synth's architecture is massive! http://www.rhodeschroma.com/
-
8/12 voice Analog synth from DSI in the P8 desktop price range with USB MIDI 2.0/3,0 at around (1300~1400 euro) where you could allocate each voice to an individual midi channel, and you could use for example (timbres x voices) 2 x 4 , 1 x 8 (as today, but also) 4x1+2x2,4x1+2x2 etc.. Lots of folks don't need a lot of poly for for some sounds, even mono is fine and having several of these would be nice. Wouldn't this be technically possible with current P6/P8/12's with a firmware change?
Other ideas could be a P8/P6 or P12 based low cost 4 voice 1U module w/o knobs (jutst MIDI), at a low price, where you could hook 2 or 3 up together for more poly (or as an extension for voice for a P8 from 8 to 12 etc.) .
-
https://reverb.com/news/reverb-interview-dave-smith-on-synths-inspiration-and-experimentation
"We have a couple surprises coming up soon and more in the works after that."
. o O ( hopefully small voice count modules )
-
https://reverb.com/news/reverb-interview-dave-smith-on-synths-inspiration-and-experimentation
"We have a couple surprises coming up soon and more in the works after that."
. o O ( hopefully small voice count modules )
I'm hoping for mini keys.
-
I wonder if one of those new items could be an OB-6 Module.
-
Probably about time to pick up this thread again, now that we know what the last new DSI instrument was.
I've already said my things, if not in this thread, then elsewhere. I was tempted to make a thread called "Another Man's Quest for the Perfect Mono Synth," but I'm not quite as rigorous as Sacred Synthesis in my requirements. And also, I'm willing to entertain the possibility that the Little Phatty and the Evolver are co-perfect mono synths, and that maybe there's no need for a quest at all.
If DSI were to decide to make another mono synth, here's all I want:
(1) Three octaves. I've got an acoustic piano, so 37 keys does it for me on a mono synth.
(2) Nice wooden cabinetry, like the Prophet 6.
(3) I mean, really, basically a monophonic Prophet 6.
(4) But with or without the effects section. Don't care.
(5) CV ins would be essential, though. CV outs would be way cool. I'm planning on buying a CP-251, and I want to keep it when I change synths.
Yeah, that's pretty much it. If something like this comes along by the next NAMM, and is priced somewhere in the Pro2 range, it'll be sitting on my synth table. If not, I dunno. Maybe I'll just get a Voyager or some crazy thing. Or revisit the Pro2. Who knows? That's the fun of the whole thing.
But what do I think they're going to do? I think they're going to release an OB6 module. And I also think we haven't seen the end of Prophet 6/OB6 as a platform for new oscillator/filter/signal routing combinations.
-
For me a 12 voice, two timbal P6/OB6 with the modulation abilities of the P12/P2 would be a definate buy.
Something like the VS would be pretty neat as well.
-
I guess posting this here makes sense: http://forum.davesmithinstruments.com/index.php/topic,399.0.html (http://forum.davesmithinstruments.com/index.php/topic,399.0.html)
-
I've thought about this after watching the Nashville Users Group clip, and I can only see (albeit blindly) three collaborations that might line up for next month's release. Mind you - I have no clue what I am talking about, just guessing wildly.
- Keyboard Sampler with Dave Rossum, possibly with sample import capability (e.g., Prophet 2000 and 3000, E-mu EIII / Emax, Akai/MPC, others) and definitely with analogue filters (SSM-style, as found in the Pro 2 and Prophet 6). Like the Tempest, this is a known product area that the legacy Sequential product line made more than one attempt at.
- Polyphonic Synthesizer with true Moog ladder filters (!), as it's highly unlikely that Moog Music would build one themselves with any great degree of reliability. This would likely use the same mainboard, or an expanded version with a larger number of CV inputs and outputs.
- Wavetable / Hybrid Synthesizer, possibly with Wolfgang Palm, and maybe with a retro touch along the lines of the OB-6, and definitely with analogue filters, though I think that this might be a great opportunity for Curtis (Wave 2) + SSM filters (Wave 2.x) in the same unit. Anyone notice that the Waldorf Eurorack modules are missing a proper analogue filter?
-
Now this is what I would call a rather surprising move: http://djworx.com/worlds-collide-dave-smith-meets-pioneer-dj/ (http://djworx.com/worlds-collide-dave-smith-meets-pioneer-dj/)
-
!
-
Q: What do you get if you cross Pioneer DJ with Dave Smith?
A: A sad, sad thing.
-
I've thought about this after watching the Nashville Users Group clip, and I can only see (albeit blindly) three collaborations that might line up for next month's release. Mind you - I have no clue what I am talking about, just guessing wildly.
- Keyboard Sampler with Dave Rossum, possibly with sample import capability (e.g., Prophet 2000 and 3000, E-mu EIII / Emax, Akai/MPC, others) and definitely with analogue filters (SSM-style, as found in the Pro 2 and Prophet 6). Like the Tempest, this is a known product area that the legacy Sequential product line made more than one attempt at.
- Polyphonic Synthesizer with true Moog ladder filters (!), as it's highly unlikely that Moog Music would build one themselves with any great degree of reliability. This would likely use the same mainboard, or an expanded version with a larger number of CV inputs and outputs.
- Wavetable / Hybrid Synthesizer, possibly with Wolfgang Palm, and maybe with a retro touch along the lines of the OB-6, and definitely with analogue filters, though I think that this might be a great opportunity for Curtis (Wave 2) + SSM filters (Wave 2.x) in the same unit. Anyone notice that the Waldorf Eurorack modules are missing a proper analogue filter?
I hope not... that would fill out my last three stereo channels in my mixer, and at the same time leave a big hole in my wallet :-\
-
I just familiarized myself with Pioneer DJ's catalog. They make four types of sad things. Oh, and if my comments below make it seem like I have no respect for the art of DJing, that's only because I have no respect for the art of DJing.
(1) The make "Players." Players are basically CD players with extra buttons. They also play other media, and give you ways to blend different things together on the beat. So that the dancers can keep dancing, or something.
(2) They also make "Mixers." DJ mixers are sort of like real mixers, except that they use RCA jacks that can last up to about a week before breaking. You need one of these if you use multiple players.
(3) Pioneer DJ also makes "Controllers," which allow you to pretend that your CD player (see #1) is a turntable, so that the artist can move it back and forth and make pretend scratching sounds.
(4) And the other sad thing that Pioneer DJ makes? "All-in-one systems," which combine all three of the other sad things into a single sad thing.
I can't wait to see what DSI brings to this table. Some sort of analog rhythm unit makes the most sense, and may serve to extend Pioneer DJ's catalog into less sad things. But such a rhythm unit would logically have to be plagued with RCA jacks. Roland used to (maybe still does, but who cares?) make pretty cool (but also plagued with RCA jacks) DJ-oriented samplers. These almost made DJing seem potentially interesting. Maybe DSI is getting back into the sample market via the groove sampler, which is still sad, but perhaps hints at real instruments to come.
Whatever it turns out to be, I'm preparing my best shrug.
-
Nice summary. :D
I'm hoping for good things but prepping for "our new DJ gear has dBBD delays and two analog filters from DSI". And a tempo synced LFO or two for the filters.
Also hoping it doesn't budge my GAS needle.
-
Sampling? Analogue filters? A few analogue oscillators? And the mass-market uptake (from a much-larger dance/DJ-oriented prosumer electronics manufacturer, no less) to justify a new run of DSI-120 (or whatever the new equivalent might be) synthesizer-on-a-chip(s)?
For those who wanted drum synths or low-end analogue / hybrid sound modules to replace the Mopho / Tetra / Evolver, this might be exactly what you asked for. And-in a clever bit of staging-it bypasses the noise of the Superbooth announcements that nearly everyone else would be looking for cues from.
(edited) And yes, BBD delays would be cool, too....
-
Q: What do you get if you cross Pioneer DJ with Dave Smith?
A: A sad, sad thing.
Believe me - I feel your pain, and share it. Pardon my lack of enthusiasm, but it's another box for the dance crowd, while fine keyboard music drums its fingers in impatience. I sure hope this is not DSI's new direction - smaller instruments, shorter keyboards, fewer voices, and this kind of gadget. How about some desktop and rackmount effects designed just for keyboardists? And some five-octave instruments once again? C'mon now, let's get back to the major league with musical instruments designed for grown men.
Here I am, able and eager as can be to put some money into my set up, and nothing new strikes me. Amazingly, after all these years, nothing yet makes my Poly Evolvers and Prophet '08s look obsolete. They're looking bigger and better by comparison every day.
Hopefully, next year's new instrument will resemble in size and power the earlier days of DSI.
-
Well Dave mentioned yet another surprising collaboration in a recent interview so that could indeed be this Pioneer DJ thingy. However, I noticed that all the articles I could find about the collab were deleted again and that its Great Trustability Day (TM) over here now so could it be a date dependent artifact? ;-)
-
Well Dave mentioned yet another surprising collaboration in a recent interview so that could indeed be this Pioneer DJ thingy. However, I noticed that all the articles I could find about the collab were deleted again and that its Great Trustability Day (TM) over here now so could it be a date dependent artifact? ;-)
I was thinking about an April fool hoax as well. Who knows? If there's any truth to it, it would certainly be unexpected. But I also find it hard to imagine what could be the outcome of such a collaboration. I mean it's not that DJ stuff is the hottest new thing in town, nor do I see any room for another pad controller (if the design of the ad was anything to go by).
Most people I know were disappointed that this wasn't about DSI and Buchla.
-
Maybe they'll reissue this one ;D:
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-C7SbvtlLwfU/T_VqRNppvHI/AAAAAAAADVM/Y7xHDNcrgGg/s1600/k58-36_37.gif)
-
But April fools' jokes are supposed to be funny, like Moog's polyphonic Theremin stunt. Now that was funny. But this is just plain depressing.
-
Just to be clear, I'm not wishing that anything old be re-issued. (My only exceptions to this were the ARP Odyssey and 2600.) I'm wishing for something new and big...as always.
I'd like to see many of the advances of these past few years poured into one large instrument: Pro 2 filters, Prophet-6 oscillators, OB-6 effects, and Prophet 12 size and voice architecture. I'm willing to spend up to $4,000 for the big one, if it's really good. Otherwise, I'll have half-a-dozen Prophet '08 modules hanging from the ceiling, or I'm going to start wandering over to Modal Electronics. I'm tired of the small/medium-sized stuff. It's nothing an organist can work with, nor enough for a composer of neo-classical music. I mean business when I make music, and fiddling around with backpack-sized gear ain't business. Besides, I never take my synthesizers hiking.
-
But April fools' jokes are supposed to be funny, like Moog's polyphonic Theremin stunt. Now that was funny. But this is just plain depressing.
Yeah, but it had me researching DJ equipment, which is #$%ing hilarious. I have to give it up for that one.
-
I'd like to see many of the advances of these past few years poured into one large instrument: Pro 2 filters, Prophet-6 oscillators, OB-6 effects, and Prophet 12 size and voice architecture.
Welcome to the club! Please make a smaller voice count desktop module for me. Complex voice and strong fundamentals are the way to go!
-
Yeah, but it had me researching DJ equipment, which is #$%ing hilarious. I have to give it up for that one.
If you want an evil April fools joke how about this one: DSI will significantly extend their team of software developers in order to meet the demand of their existing product users... ;-)
-
I think the collaboration will be a memory Moog with the same form factor as OB6 Pro6.
-
I think the collaboration will be a memory Moog with the same form factor as OB6 Pro6.
News of collaboration with Moog would be much better, as an April Fools Day bit.
-
Hybrid cowbell. Everything else is a joke.
-
...
Out of this, all kinds of products, including a 1V/O BBD Eurorack module could be introduced ;)
One can always dream I suppose...
Sounds like my dream came true!
Heard the news about the DSM-03 via the wonderful Cuckoo!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQhqqwGazbA
-
http://djtechtools.com/2016/04/05/toraiz-sp-16-pioneer-djs-first-sampler-syncs-cdjs/ (http://djtechtools.com/2016/04/05/toraiz-sp-16-pioneer-djs-first-sampler-syncs-cdjs/)
-
Chysn and I have already pre-ordered. Can't wait.
-
Chysn and I have already pre-ordered. Can't wait.
I knew you would love the colors.
-
Actually that looks pretty interesting to me especially if it has 16 P6 filters in it.
-
Chysn and I have already pre-ordered. Can't wait.
I knew you would love the colors.
Right now, I'm dying my hair the same colors in celebration.
-
Actually that looks pretty interesting to me especially if it has 16 P6 filters in it.
Looking at the video it seems when they talk about "filters" they are talking about two filters LP and HP, so I guess on the main outs.
Seems a shame a 16 channel sampler with 16 filters would have been pretty neat.
-
Actually that looks pretty interesting to me especially if it has 16 P6 filters in it.
Looking at the video it seems when they talk about "filters" they are talking about two filters LP and HP, so I guess on the main outs.
Seems a shame a 16 channel sampler with 16 filters would have been pretty neat.
I'm not even sure about the term sampler. It just seems to be a sample playback device.
-
It does have audio ins so it could be.
Even though it has "DJ" attached to it it looks like an MPC type thing with an XOX type sequencer, if it supports chromatic sample playing that is; looking at some of the screen dumps there is a pitch parameter and it does have midi in and also a USB host port so I'm hoping it does. There are scant technical specs around though.
-
Right now, I'm dying my hair the same colors in celebration.
We want picture proof! ;)
-
Okay, here's the picture proof. I put my best nose on for the photograph. And I'm really happy in this selfie because I just designed another monster brass patch on my Prophet '08s.
-
So now you are a real DJ, eh!? . o O ( hehe )
. o O ( run for cover )
-
hmm... seems like my prayers has been heard... somewhat... a sampler with analog filters.... this MAY be just what I need :) ... going to look a bit more on the specs...
-
Looks like this may be exactly what I need to fire off samples on the fly, with analog filters and all... pricing is as always a bit steep, but it's tolerable... Now I only need some SysEx info.... as always ;D
-
Hmm... 16 pads... I hardly believe this thing will have 16 filters for that price... there is no info I can find that explains the signal chain on this thing... If my intuition serves me right, those filters is probably global... probably not what I want anyway...
-
Yep that's what I think.
If it has 16 (or even 8 ) I would be very interested. I guess as they haven't mentioned it though it's probably just on the mains:(
-
This is good news. DSI probably devoted like five minutes to this project. "Here are some chips. Here's some documentation. Don't forget to put our logo on it." I bet that precious little actual synth-designing time was wasted in the making of whatever this thing is*.
* Yes, I know what it is. That was me being crotchety.
-
Hmm... 16 pads... I hardly believe this thing will have 16 filters for that price... there is no info I can find that explains the signal chain on this thing... If my intuition serves me right, those filters is probably global... probably not what I want anyway...
Forget it. These filters will be global. Otherwise this would be a bargain, which I doubt looking at Pioneer's usual price policy.
-
Hmm... 16 pads... I hardly believe this thing will have 16 filters for that price... there is no info I can find that explains the signal chain on this thing... If my intuition serves me right, those filters is probably global... probably not what I want anyway...
Forget it. These filters will be global. Otherwise this would be a bargain, which I doubt looking at Pioneer's usual price policy.
Exactly... and considering it's just a single lowpass, and hipass, with a bit of distortion, on the global outs... then that price is simply outrageous.... I bet the filters is not even MIDI controllable, but probably just hardwired on the global outs... I could make something similar by taking a much cheaper sample player box, and add a DSI modular filter on the main outs, or any other filterbox.
I know this is meant for DJ's now, so I'll let them waste their money on this thing...
DSI: Next invention please! ;D
-
I can imagine a lot of disappointed Tempest X-owners, who wanted their own samples, will be getting some long faces when they see this at first, and think it's the holy grail of what they wanted, only to find out it's not...
-
DSI probably devoted like five minutes to this project. "Here are some chips. Here's some documentation. Don't forget to put our logo on it."
Well I would not be too surprised if they spend a few days and some prototypes on it before sending off the final version of the circuits to Pioneer. After all modifications were made to the P6 filters such a drive and resonance limits. That is probably a bit more than just an edit/compile/produce dance.
But, hehe, good joke! ;)
-
Okay, so it's stereo, and there are a couple of other differences:
http://createdigitalmusic.com/2016/04/we-talked-to-dave-smith-about-those-pioneer-sampler-filters/ (http://createdigitalmusic.com/2016/04/we-talked-to-dave-smith-about-those-pioneer-sampler-filters/)
-
Sonic state video:
https://youtu.be/bGBr9XcDITA
Create digital music report:
http://createdigitalmusic.com/2016/04/we-got-our-hands-on-pioneers-new-sps-16-sampler/
-
Okay, so you can actually sample, which is good on top of the true stereo filter.
-
For me a 12 voice, two timbal P6/OB6 with the modulation abilities of the P12/P2 would be a definate buy.
Something like the VS would be pretty neat as well.
+1
-
Now that I have turned to multi timbral usage of my gear, I realize, that what I want to see from DSI, is a top notch synth, like the P12, but with a multi mode for 16 channels... a module of sorts, meant for the studio user as a workhorse. 16 voices, so that each channel can have at least 1 voice configured... also the voice allocation should be dynamic across the 16 channels (not like on Evolver, where you reserve a certain number of voices)... on top of that, it should have digital quality FX built in, so that the machines can work as a stand alone device without need for external processing... a delay and reverb as master FX, and a single insert FX for each voice individualy giving you stuff like chorus, phaser, flanger, ensemble, distortion etc... a separate simple LO/HIPASS for each channel as well, for making EQ adjustments on individual channels.
That's what I would really like to see from DSI... what the engine should be, is another story... I just really would like a rack/module that would take the job as a workhorse... very few synths with analog filters and amps do that. If they can make a 12 voice P12, they can do a 16 voice as well, and the FX part is already partly implemented in the new P6/OB6 designs... the voice technology could easily be taken from the P12.
I won't even mind if they called it the "Prophet 16" :D
-
It would be great if they could update the P12 to work like the Modal 002 where you can set it up as a number of synths with different voice counts on different channels.
So you could have a 6 voice poly on channel 1, and then 6 mono synths on channels 2-7 for instance.
I'd pay for that upgrade!
-
It would be great if they could update the P12 to work like the Modal 002 where you can set it up as a number of synths with different voice counts on different channels.
So you could have a 6 voice poly on channel 1, and then 6 mono synths on channels 2-7 for instance.
I'd pay for that upgrade!
I'd rather see it allocate the voices dynamically... it's much more efficient as you will most likely not be playing notes on all channels at the same time... what I like is, when you have 16 channels that you can set up as individual instruments... that makes the multi setup more flexible... even if you only have 16 voices, you could still have 16 different instruments playing at different times... if you allocate voices to a channel, they will not be reused for other instruments when that channel is not used.
Of course a mixed version would be even better... :)
I know that you could use program changes instead, but most synths cut off sounds abruptly when doing this, or gives clicks and pops, so it's not really useful.
But you're right... DSI could update the P12 to work like this I guess... I don't see any hardware restraints in doing that. As it is now, you only have two channels in multi mode, and if one is set to mono mode, then 5 voices are completely wasted... that's why I'd like a dynamic allocation... now I know that it gives some hardware restraints because of the hardwired outputs, but still... if you just decide to use only the main output, it should be perfectly doable.
-
It really depends on what you plan to do. If driving a multi-timbral synthesizer from a MPE controller or similar pleasures its way easier to have one voice per channel or two voices per channel in case of stacked sounds and do the voice allocation in software either in the MPE controller or on a computer.
If wanting to use the synthesizer as a flexible studio tool dynamic voice allocation may be a better idea. However, voice allocation in the instrument will be a challenge and could quite likely cause many interesting edge cases including causing the voices you want to ring out be cut short. And so on. Its a complex design/implementation task and who knows if a synthesizer company have the resources to make a solution that is good enough in practical use?
-
It really depends on what you plan to do. If driving a multi-timbral synthesizer from a MPE controller or similar pleasures its way easier to have one voice per channel or two voices per channel in case of stacked sounds and do the voice allocation in software either in the MPE controller or on a computer.
If wanting to use the synthesizer as a flexible studio tool dynamic voice allocation may be a better idea. However, voice allocation in the instrument will be a challenge and could quite likely cause many interesting edge cases including causing the voices you want to ring out be cut short. And so on. Its a complex design/implementation task and who knows if a synthesizer company have the resources to make a solution that is good enough in practical use?
Well... digital multitimbral synths exist that does this, so the only problem I can see is the retriggering of the voices if analog parts are involved... with a dynamic voice allocation, a given voice would have to be totaly re-initialized when retriggered, since it will require it to take on different sounds... with the hardwired voice way, you can just initialize the voice once, as you would be certain it is the same when retriggering it.
But with a voice structure like the P12, most is digital, only the VCF and VCA are analog... and if you think about it, the Tempest actualy does it... yes it has some retriggering flaws because of it, but it's only in the analog voices, not the digital ones.
Maybe the current hardware architecture of the P12 is not that well suited anyway... I'm thinking about it's voice based architecture... Dave always use a "master CPU" to take the MIDI computing, and controlling each voice's own DSP chip... I don't know if it is fast enough to change on the fly... or if problems will arise because this communication is one-way only... we have seen how DSI portamento works in polyphonic mode because of this.
Still... I don't see why a new synth could not be made to have dynamic allocation... and I would really like to see one... but I guess I could live even with hardwired voice allocation, it would just be more limited.
-
Yeah Razmo, its certainly doable and after all its "just software". However there are some differences between software synthesizers and analog electronics synthesizers. Most notably that in a software synthesizer one already have plenty of software development resources and are only managing data structures whereas in a digitally controlled analog machine one not only have to manage the physics and timing of the controlled analog circuits but also have to be aware that software is only part of the game in the overall engineering of the instrument.
Implementing multi-timbral functionality is mostly a question of data structures, resource management and smart code so it certainly can be done. But I am also trying to be realistic given past events. I mean how would it feel if show stopping issues with the multi-timbral mode would eventually be considered unimportant? With that said I will of cause repeat my past views that I would just LOVE to see future multi-timbral complex voices from any competent manufacturer, especially DSI. And that hopefully with both one/two voice per channel and dynamic voice assign modes as both have their advantages possibly even when it comes to voice setup timing.
At weak moments in the past I have considered offering to help out with such development but of cause that would be extremely stupid of me to enter the dragon's cave without protective measures of any kind. So I better don't do that! ;)
-
At this point, DSI will have to produce one impressive poly synth to get me to buy something new. It's certainly possible, but it would require my selling one of my current instruments. Having worked so much with my PEKs and P'08s over the last seven years, rather than grow tired of them, I've grown to appreciate their strengths all the more.
I had saved up about $2,500 for a new instrument, but my car has finally given up the ghost and claimed every synthesizer-bound penny. Back to the drawing board. Still, I would love to see DSI produce a successor to the Prophet '08, something a little more complex and with a rawer analog tone, yet, still a clear successor.
-
At this point, DSI will have to produce one impressive poly synth to get me to buy something new. It's certainly possible, but it would require my selling one of my current instruments. Having worked so much with my PEKs and P'08s over the last seven years, rather than grow tired of them, I've grown to appreciate their strengths all the more.
I had saved up about $2,500 for a new instrument, but my car has finally given up the ghost and claimed every synthesizer-bound penny. Back to the drawing board. Still, I would love to see DSI produce a successor to the Prophet '08, something a little more complex and with a rawer analog tone, yet, still a clear successor.
The "Prophetizer 2000" for the price of two cars and a grilled deer. ;D ;D
-
[...] and a grilled deer. ;D ;D
Well deer is actually quite tasty as long as you do not have to catch it with your own car!
. o O ( :o )
Seriously, Sacred Synthesis, if you look at the current DSI offerings are there any of the machines you really really want? To me it still seems to be a choice between sound a features. So as far as I can see you are still looking for a new machine that will work for you.
Given that you generally want to wait until the OS is stable there could very well be plenty of time to save up for a new synthesizer. It is still pretty annoying the way the funds got spend. And it doesn't make the car/deer experience any more pleasant in any way of cause. But we are talking years as far as new DSI instruments are concerned as far as I can see given our past discussions.
-
I'm actually quite happy with my current set up, but I was going to enlarge it. "Better" to me means more of the same. But I would love a Prophet '08 in a Prophet 12 package. If the new instrument is good enough, I'll be willing to part with a PEK for it. That's what I'm presently hoping for, but these things tend not to go my way.
As for instrument names, I'm willing to go with anything that's venison-themed. How about the "Doe-pho"? Or else, the "Prophet 12-Point"?
-
As Dave Smith is dreaming up his next new synthesizer, I imagine him tossing and turning all night long. Finally, his wife turns to him and asks, "Honey, why can't you sleep"? He answers, "The number, I can't come up with the number. I've used almost all of them: Pro One, Tetr4, Mopho x4, Prophet 5, Prophet-6, Prophet '08, Prophet 10, Prophet 12. If I make a Prophet 13, no one will buy it, for fear of bad musical luck!"
In trying to guess what Dave will make next, the first question that comes to mind is the number of voices. The poor guy; he's almost out of options, other than going with odd numbers. A Prophet 7 - I don't know. It just doesn't have that ring to it. I think the next number should be 10. Why can't he re-use an instrument name?
-
What about 3, 7, 9, and 11? Or maybe only prime numbers? - There you have it: Prophet Prime. ;D
[Sleazy 1970s advertisment voice on]: "Prophet Prime: Sweet as lime, costs only a dime." [off]
-
Or change "Prophet" to any other word (real or imagined), then all the numbers become immediately available again: Prophet 6, OB-6, Deer-Seeker-6....
-
Deer-Seeker-6....
Brilliant! Sounds like a woody synth too.
-
Deer-Seeker-6....
Brilliant! Sounds like a woody synth too.
Nothing but Sawtooths...
-
Deer-Seeker-6....
Brilliant! Sounds like a woody synth too.
Nothing but Sawtooths...
Yes!
-
I object! I'm not seeking deer. How about the "Deer Slayer 10"?
-
I object! I'm not seeking deer. How about the "Deer Slayer 10"?
Nord already does red keyboards.
-
I would gladly part with a Poly Evolver Keyboard for a new ten-voice synthesizer with onboard delay, a high pass filter, long envelope times, a five-octave keyboard, and a Prophet '08 voice architecture. The only catch is the type and number of oscillators. I'd be happy with three DCOs, but DSI seems to have moved on from them. VCOs would be expensive, but DOs would sound only mediocre.
-
I object! I'm not seeking deer. How about the "Deer Slayer 10"?
Starring Charles Bronson!
-
I object! I'm not seeking deer. How about the "Deer Slayer 10"?
Starring Charles Bronson!
Now that was too easy.
-
I would gladly part with a Poly Evolver Keyboard for a new ten-voice synthesizer with onboard delay, a high pass filter, long envelope times, a five-octave keyboard, and a Prophet '08 voice architecture. The only catch is the type and number of oscillators. I'd be happy with three DCOs, but DSI seems to have moved on from them. VCOs would be expensive, but DOs would sound only mediocre.
It seems to me that you've already found what you're looking for. I think you're right that DSI might move on form the DCOs soon. I'd assume that the Prophet '08 and the Mopho x4 sell well, but who knows what happens after Behringer releases their budget synth and/or how that will affect the market. Either way, it seems to be safe to say that the Prophet '08 is probably pretty high on the list of the next retirements.
Replacing your current rig with VCOs in terms of voices, would end up being quite expensive, plus: you want more modulation options than the Prophet-6 and OB-6 offer. On the other hand, the Prophet 12 doesn't seem to be quite there yet for you in terms of sound. So that doesn't leave many options except for waiting for what the future brings.
-
I object! I'm not seeking deer. How about the "Deer Slayer 10"?
Starring Charles Bronson!
Soundtrack by Jimmy Page.
-
I object! I'm not seeking deer. How about the "Deer Slayer 10"?
Starring Charles Bronson!
Soundtrack by Jimmy Page.
Oddly enough, the sound track for Death Wish (starring Charles Bronson) was done by Herbbie Hancock.... That concludes our trivia moment.
-
I object! I'm not seeking deer. How about the "Deer Slayer 10"?
Starring Charles Bronson!
Soundtrack by Jimmy Page.
Oddly enough, the sound track for Death Wish (starring Charles Bronson) was done by Herbbie Hancock.... That concludes our trivia moment.
Yeah, I was referring to the sequel.
-
I would gladly part with a Poly Evolver Keyboard for a new ten-voice synthesizer with onboard delay, a high pass filter, long envelope times, a five-octave keyboard, and a Prophet '08 voice architecture. The only catch is the type and number of oscillators. I'd be happy with three DCOs, but DSI seems to have moved on from them. VCOs would be expensive, but DOs would sound only mediocre.
It seems to me that you've already found what you're looking for. I think you're right that DSI might move on form the DCOs soon. I'd assume that the Prophet '08 and the Mopho x4 sell well, but who knows what happens after Behringer releases their budget synth and/or how that will affect the market. Either way, it seems to be safe to say that the Prophet '08 is probably pretty high on the list of the next retirements.
Replacing your current rig with VCOs in terms of voices, would end up being quite expensive, plus: you want more modulation options than the Prophet-6 and OB-6 offer. On the other hand, the Prophet 12 doesn't seem to be quite there yet for you in terms of sound. So that doesn't leave many options except for waiting for what the future brings.
And that's my plan: be content with what I have, and meanwhile, watch what DSI cooks up next. Again, I'd love an enlarged Prophet '08. A couple more voices, a couple more DCOs, and a few more features. But I still would like to get a really raw bona fide analog instrument into my set up.
On the other hand, it's hard not to wonder if DSI will finally produce a pure digital instrument, something like a modern Wave Station or Prophet VS. It would be a fine way to round out the DSI line up, as long as the Prophet '08 was still around.
-
I object! I'm not seeking deer. How about the "Deer Slayer 10"?
Starring Charles Bronson!
Soundtrack by Jimmy Page.
Oddly enough, the sound track for Death Wish (starring Charles Bronson) was done by Herbbie Hancock.... That concludes our trivia moment.
Yeah, I was referring to the sequel.
Boy, this is thee place for high culture. The things I've learned from you guys!
-
I object! I'm not seeking deer. How about the "Deer Slayer 10"?
Starring Charles Bronson!
Soundtrack by Jimmy Page.
Oddly enough, the sound track for Death Wish (starring Charles Bronson) was done by Herbbie Hancock.... That concludes our trivia moment.
Yeah, I was referring to the sequel.
There was a sequel?!?!
-
I object! I'm not seeking deer. How about the "Deer Slayer 10"?
Starring Charles Bronson!
Soundtrack by Jimmy Page.
Oddly enough, the sound track for Death Wish (starring Charles Bronson) was done by Herbbie Hancock.... That concludes our trivia moment.
Yeah, I was referring to the sequel.
There was a sequel?!?!
Two in fact. ;D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ckg-D6dMLw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ckg-D6dMLw)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDuQxOIvVx8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDuQxOIvVx8)
-
I object! I'm not seeking deer. How about the "Deer Slayer 10"?
Starring Charles Bronson!
Soundtrack by Jimmy Page.
Oddly enough, the sound track for Death Wish (starring Charles Bronson) was done by Herbbie Hancock.... That concludes our trivia moment.
Yeah, I was referring to the sequel.
Boy, this is thee place for high culture. The things I've learned from you guys!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glx_kpo3wAI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glx_kpo3wAI)
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glx_kpo3wAI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glx_kpo3wAI)
Damn you! ;)
Too bad that white prophet 12 didn't come with autotune and a mic input built in.
-
I would actually like to see a MoPho X6. Give it 49 keys. It could be priced at $1200 - $1250 USD. :)
-
For me a 12 voice, two timbral P6/OB6 with the modulation abilities of the P12/P2 would be a definate buy.
Same for me!
With (or without) the P12/Pro2 interface which is great
At least bi-timbral (even better with multi-timbral voice allocation)
-
If there's to be a new DSI flagship, then that's the most obvious blend: the P12-P6 masterpiece, which would certainly cross the $3,000 mark.
-
If there's to be a new DSI flagship, then that's the most obvious blend: the P12-P6 masterpiece, which would certainly cross the $3,000 mark.
I'm not sure whether that would be a realistic scenario. The design philosphy with regard to DSI's whole catalog has always been to develop instruments of which each covers a specific set of options and sound generation tools without too many overlaps between the single devices. And while there have been groups of instruments like the Prophet '08, Mopho, and Tetra for example, or the Evolver line, there has never really been an instrument that does it all in one package. In that sense, I'd expect that the closest you'll get to a P12-P6 masterpiece in the long run is in fact going to be a combination of a Prophet 12 and a Prophet-6, or two of the latter for the sake of an equal voice number.
I also don't think that DSI is a company that has one flagship. At least with regard to polyphonic keyboard synthesizers I currently see them offering three flagships: the Prophet 12, the Prophet-6, and the OB-6.
Beyond speculating about specific designs, I think it's safe to assume that the following instruments won't happen (anytime soon):
- a new drum machine
- a monophonic version of either the Prophet-6 or the OB-6
- a bigger version of either the Prophet-6 or the OB-6
- a desktop version of the Pro 2
- just about any combination of the above in the manner of just putting two or more instruments into one box
That said, I'd expect something that differs substantially from synths like the Prophet 12 and a classic analog synth like the Prophet-6 or the OB-6. And while the latter two are gorgeous synths, one wouldn't go too far by describing them as the most conservative designs that DSI have ever developed. I don't mean that in a derogatory way, but very much in the sense of Dave saying "it's 1979 again." Taking into account that the (re-)development of the classic analog polysynth design has kept DSI busy from the latter half of 2014 up to the release of the OB-6 (besides the occasional firmware maintenance of course), I would strongly assume that the odds are in favor of a different direction now.
-
There are only so many possible variations on the analog poly synth theme. It seems that DSI has covered these, as well as two hybrid designs, so a little redundancy could be understandable. I would expect to see either a new instrument that could worthily replace the Prophet '08, or perhaps a mostly/entirely digital instrument closer to the VS tradition.
As long as I'm well-supplied in the analog department, then I'd be entirely in favor of a purely digital synthesizer.
-
There are only so many possible variations on the analog poly synth theme. It seems that DSI has covered these, as well as two hybrid designs, so a little redundancy could be understandable. I would expect to see either a new instrument that could worthily replace the Prophet '08, or perhaps a mostly/entirely digital instrument closer to the VS tradition.
As long as I'm well-supplied in the analog department, then I'd be entirely in favor of a purely digital synthesizer.
As much as I hate to prophesize, I think you're probably on to something, something in the vein of the VS is a logical next creation.
Unless of course they're opening up an area of synthesis we've never seen before… Which I think is what everybody is really waiting for.
-
What sort of area could you imagine?
Dave is brilliant and inventive, but he always pours this into a fairly traditional synthesizer form, such as the Prophet 12. I think there's still room for another member or two in the Prophet analog line. But a break from this into an Evolver/VS/Wavestation type of instrument would be very refreshing and exciting.
-
There are only so many possible variations on the analog poly synth theme. It seems that DSI has covered these, as well as two hybrid designs, so a little redundancy could be understandable. I would expect to see either a new instrument that could worthily replace the Prophet '08, or perhaps a mostly/entirely digital instrument closer to the VS tradition.
As long as I'm well-supplied in the analog department, then I'd be entirely in favor of a purely digital synthesizer.
It may be of interest here to note that the Dave Smith Modular DSM03 Feedback Module is shipping around October 10th. DSI describes it as an "all-digital module" (see http://forum.davesmithinstruments.com/index.php/topic,476.msg8586.html#msg8586). So presumably, this includes the DSM03's lowpass filter. It's possible that they designed a new digital filter just for this one module, but how likely is that?
-
There are only so many possible variations on the analog poly synth theme. It seems that DSI has covered these, as well as two hybrid designs, so a little redundancy could be understandable. I would expect to see either a new instrument that could worthily replace the Prophet '08, or perhaps a mostly/entirely digital instrument closer to the VS tradition.
As long as I'm well-supplied in the analog department, then I'd be entirely in favor of a purely digital synthesizer.
Certainly. That's why I personally wouldn't expect another analog poly synth any time soon, not even a successor to the Prophet '08. Now the cat is out of the bag with regard to the DSM03 module and its digital filter, an entirely digital synth might even be a possibility.
Edit: chysn was faster. ;)
-
There are only so many possible variations on the analog poly synth theme. It seems that DSI has covered these, as well as two hybrid designs, so a little redundancy could be understandable. I would expect to see either a new instrument that could worthily replace the Prophet '08, or perhaps a mostly/entirely digital instrument closer to the VS tradition.
As long as I'm well-supplied in the analog department, then I'd be entirely in favor of a purely digital synthesizer.
It may be of interest here to note that the Dave Smith Modular DSM03 Feedback Module is shipping around October 10th. DSI describes it as an "all-digital module" (see http://forum.davesmithinstruments.com/index.php/topic,476.msg8586.html#msg8586). So presumably, this includes the DSM03's lowpass filter. It's possible that they designed a new digital filter just for this one module, but how likely is that?
Yes, it could be the first stage of a new digital instrument.
-
There are only so many possible variations on the analog poly synth theme. It seems that DSI has covered these, as well as two hybrid designs, so a little redundancy could be understandable. I would expect to see either a new instrument that could worthily replace the Prophet '08, or perhaps a mostly/entirely digital instrument closer to the VS tradition.
As long as I'm well-supplied in the analog department, then I'd be entirely in favor of a purely digital synthesizer.
Certainly. That's why I personally wouldn't expect another analog poly synth any time soon, not even a successor to the Prophet '08. Now the cat is out of the bag with regard to the DSM03 module and its digital filter, an entirely digital synth might even be a possibility.
If the Prophet '08 doesn't have a successor, then I'll fill my music room with a dozen keyboard and module units of the original! It's just perfect for my uses.
-
What sort of area could you imagine?
Attached is a little overview/inventory about digital synthesis models from Julius O. Smith's article "Viewpoints on the History of Digital Synthesis" (Center for Computer Research in Music and Acoustics, Department of Music, Stanford University, December 28, 2005). So that's one starting point.
-
If the Prophet '08 doesn't have a successor, then I'll fill my music room with a dozen keyboard and module units of the original! It's just perfect for my uses.
I'm just assuming that it would seem slightly redundant to release yet another analog poly synth after the Prophet-6 and the OB-6, even though the Prophet '08's architecture differs dramatically from those two.
On a different note: The only aspects that haven't been recycled after the discontinuation of the Evolvers are a true stereo signal path, stereo inputs, a filter split option, ring modulation, the option to upload user wavetables, and of course a hybrid front end.
-
Yes, I'm amazed that the stereo hardwired oscillators haven't become standardized on DSI synths. After all, if you don't like it, you can tweak them into mono.
It's in vain, but I do wish DSI would issue a new Poly Evolver with clean digital oscillators. It would be quite the treat to be able to use those messy tones over the whole range of the keyboard. The digital aliasing is the only flaw of the instrument that ever bothered me.
-
If the Prophet '08 doesn't have a successor, then I'll fill my music room with a dozen keyboard and module units of the original! It's just perfect for my uses.
-
Perfect! I'll take the whole pile, please. Wait a minute...no Tetras?
-
Low chance of happening but I'd like to see 49 key MoPho X6, or something similar distilled from the synth portion of the Tempest design.
-
Certainly. That's why I personally wouldn't expect another analog poly synth any time soon, not even a successor to the Prophet '08. Now the cat is out of the bag with regard to the DSM03 module and its digital filter, an entirely digital synth might even be a possibility.
But here's the description of the DSM03 on ModularGrid (https://www.modulargrid.net/e/dave-smith-modular-dsm03-feedback), saying it's an analog filter:
"We took the feedback feature originally in the Evolver (also on the Pro 2, and Prophet 12), the idea is you have a tuned feedback loop that takes the audio output, runs it back through the analogue filter, and then through a delay line... so you can do Karplus-Strong synthesis with it, or you can just use if for mangling sounds" - Dave Smith
So who knows what to think. DSI hasn't addressed any questions about the filter, so we'll just have to wait like two whole weeks. I've pre-ordered the DSM03, and as soon as it arrives, I'll post a demo of the filter.
-
Certainly. That's why I personally wouldn't expect another analog poly synth any time soon, not even a successor to the Prophet '08. Now the cat is out of the bag with regard to the DSM03 module and its digital filter, an entirely digital synth might even be a possibility.
But here's the description of the DSM03 on ModularGrid (https://www.modulargrid.net/e/dave-smith-modular-dsm03-feedback), saying it's an analog filter:
"We took the feedback feature originally in the Evolver (also on the Pro 2, and Prophet 12), the idea is you have a tuned feedback loop that takes the audio output, runs it back through the analogue filter, and then through a delay line... so you can do Karplus-Strong synthesis with it, or you can just use if for mangling sounds" - Dave Smith
So who knows what to think. DSI hasn't addressed any questions about the filter, so we'll just have to wait like two whole weeks. I've pre-ordered the DSM03, and as soon as it arrives, I'll post a demo of the filter.
That's strange. But I would tend to believe what Robot Heart wrote in the according sub forum, and what Carson and Andy told me at Summer NAMM. I'm also not sure about whether that description from ModularGrid is official. Why would DSI use the British spelling of the word "analog"? - Plus: Why would they post a description on ModularGrid before even announcing and describing the DSM03 on their official site? Makes no sense to me.
-
That's strange. But I would tend to believe what Robot Heart wrote in the according sub forum, and what Carson and Andy told me at Summer NAMM. I'm also not sure about whether that description from ModularGrid is official. Why would DSI use the British spelling of the word "analog"? - Plus: Why would they post a description on ModularGrid before even announcing and describing the DSM03 on their official site? Makes no sense to me.
extempo identified the quote from a Sonic State interview with Dave Smith (in the first part of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjy_6lH3IxQ). I expect the spelling of analog was the choice of the transcriber. extempo's explanation makes sense in this context, being that Mr Smith was describing the feedback of the Evolver, Pro2, etc., and not directly speaking about the DSM03's filter.
-
extempo identified the quote from a Sonic State interview with Dave Smith (in the first part of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjy_6lH3IxQ). I expect the spelling of analog was the choice of the transcriber. extempo's explanation makes sense in this context, being that Mr Smith was describing the feedback of the Evolver, Pro2, etc., and not directly speaking about the DSM03's filter.
Makes perfect sense. Thanks for the update!
-
Whatever the new new DSI instrument is–chances are, it will neither be inexpensive nor lightweight (from an embedded software perspective):
https://www.davesmithinstruments.com/2016/11/dave-smith-instruments-hiring/
In fact–those areas of expertise are not far removed from those required for in-dash infotainment systems....
-
Whatever the new new DSI instrument is–chances are, it will neither be inexpensive nor lightweight (from an embedded software perspective):
https://www.davesmithinstruments.com/2016/11/dave-smith-instruments-hiring/
In fact–those areas of expertise are not far removed from those required for in-dash infotainment systems....
Or maybe the next instrument is going to require a navigation system. ;D
-
Or scuba gear! . o O ( menu diving )
Seriously, lets hope DSI wants not only to have more development muscle in their software department but also maintain their existing products more and better. That would be a constructive step forward from the current mode of operation.
-
Or scuba gear! . o O ( menu diving )
Haha!
Seriously, lets hope DSI wants not only to have more development muscle in their software department but also maintain their existing products more and better. That would be a constructive step forward from the current mode of operation.
It's definitely an encouraging move that is going to ease the balance between new developments and further maintenance.
-
It's definitely an encouraging move that is going to ease the balance between new developments and further maintenance.
Of cause depending on how this extra resource is used and managed! Not to mention the amount of time it will take the new hire to dive into the code base and fully understand it.
. o O ( RTFS )
-
Seriously, lets hope DSI wants not only to have more development muscle in their software department but also maintain their existing products more and better. That would be a constructive step forward from the current mode of operation.
Possibly?
https://www.davesmithinstruments.com/2016/11/dave-smith-instruments-hiring/
-
Seriously, lets hope DSI wants not only to have more development muscle in their software department but also maintain their existing products more and better. That would be a constructive step forward from the current mode of operation.
Possibly?
https://www.davesmithinstruments.com/2016/11/dave-smith-instruments-hiring/
Seems like it. Microchip PIC was used up to whatever product was released before the Prophet 12 and Pro 2 as far as I know. The Prophet 12 and Pro 2 both use Sharc DSP, and I'm pretty sure the Prophet-6 and OB-6 does too (they have digital FX after all).
Sounds to me that they're looking for someone to both maintain the old and handle the new.
-
I got the impression that DSI use PIC for the MIDI related main processor stuff and Sharc DSP for voice processors. So both are relevant for new products.
Also there is a difference between extending a team and actually change company policies. Hence the new versus maintenance hope expression!
-
Microchip PIC was used up to whatever product was released before the Prophet 12 and Pro 2 as far as I know. The Prophet 12 and Pro 2 both use Sharc DSP, and I'm pretty sure the Prophet-6 and OB-6 does too (they have digital FX after all).
Sounds to me that they're looking for someone to both maintain the old and handle the new.
You are correct, both Sharc DSPs and PIC Microchips are also used in the Prophet-6 (and the OB-6 for that matter).
You can see them both in the video I did about the inside of the Prophet-6 from about the 8:17 mark on: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0_B6jREjCo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0_B6jREjCo)
-
It's definitely an encouraging move that is going to ease the balance between new developments and further maintenance.
Of cause depending on how this extra resource is used and managed! Not to mention the amount of time it will take the new hire to dive into the code base and fully understand it.
. o O ( RTFS )
Well I'm sure they'll just be getting everyone's coffee upgrading Java for the first few weeks anyway. ;D
-
Well I'm sure they'll just be getting everyone's coffee upgrading Java for the first few weeks anyway. ;D
HA HA!
-
Well I'm sure they'll just be getting everyone's coffee upgrading Java for the first few weeks anyway. ;D
With anything Eclipse-based, so true....
-
8 voice based on the Prophet-6/OB-6 with the Pro 2 filter setup (i.e. Prophet LPF + SEM SVF) with minimum 2 LFO's, and 61 keys.
There could be a deluxe version with 12 voices, and 73 keys as well. (:
-
[...] and 61 keys.
There could be a deluxe version with 12 voices, and 73 keys as well. (:
There is always the module option (hopefully). With the advent of newer more compact and possibly more expressive controllers modules could very well be more expressive. Especially when/if DSI supports MPE and multi-timbral modes.
-
Well I'm sure they'll just be getting everyone's coffee upgrading Java for the first few weeks anyway. ;D
Never say never but I serious doubt DSI would ever sink so low use Java given they are doing embedded real-time programming for their products. I am sure their highly automated IoT (aka Internet of Traps) coffee machine are working hard on infecting all their other computers whenever it can. But that's just a fact of life these days. ;)
Starting on a new software developer job with DSI's level of OS complexity are surely going to feel like climbing plenty of nasty cliffs the first couple of months. So I cross fingers for a good recruitment process and hope this person will make a positive difference not only in developing new products but also making older products getting better updates faster.
-
8 voice based on the Prophet-6/OB-6 with the Pro 2 filter setup (i.e. Prophet LPF + SEM SVF) with minimum 2 LFO's, and 61 keys.
Bull's-eye! This sounds to me like the most reasonable and natural choice, combining DSI's best achievements to date. Add the usual module version and I'm onboard.
-
8 voice based on the Prophet-6/OB-6 with the Pro 2 filter setup (i.e. Prophet LPF + SEM SVF) with minimum 2 LFO's, and 61 keys.
There could be a deluxe version with 12 voices, and 73 keys as well. (:
I can't really see anything like that happening, especially since one could put together a similar instrument already by connecting Prophet-6 and OB-6 modules to a larger keyboard. The rest is too much of a recombination of what has already been done by DSI/Sequential. Given that DSI have many more ideas to be realized, an 8-voice reconfiguration of what has essentially just been released seems to be highly unlikely.
I mean, they'd have to develop completely new voice-cards with the hybrid filter design you've mentioned without gaining anything fundamentally new in the end. And I don't think one extra LFO and two extra voices alone would justify the amount of work that would still have to be done.
And I'm also pretty sure that we'll never see synths again that look remotely like a Prophet T8.
-
8 voice based on the Prophet-6/OB-6 with the Pro 2 filter setup (i.e. Prophet LPF + SEM SVF) with minimum 2 LFO's, and 61 keys.
There could be a deluxe version with 12 voices, and 73 keys as well. (:
I can't really see anything like that happening, especially since one could put together a similar instrument already by connecting Prophet-6 and OB-6 modules to a larger keyboard.
I think Exode's idea would be a fitting replacement for the Prophet '08.
-
8 voice based on the Prophet-6/OB-6 with the Pro 2 filter setup (i.e. Prophet LPF + SEM SVF) with minimum 2 LFO's, and 61 keys.
There could be a deluxe version with 12 voices, and 73 keys as well. (:
I can't really see anything like that happening, especially since one could put together a similar instrument already by connecting Prophet-6 and OB-6 modules to a larger keyboard.
I think Exode's idea would be a fitting replacement for the Prophet '08.
I get that thought. I guess I'm just trying to keep expectations low with reference to what has already been done by DSI. The last 2 years were basically dedicated to analog synths already, which is one reason why I don't believe that we're going to see a third one in 2017. Plus: The Prophet '08 is still around.
But even if DSI produced a Prophet '08 successor built on what they did with the Prophet-6 and the OB-6, it would certainly not be in the price category of the Prophet '08 anymore. They'd either had to lower the prices of the Prophet-6 and the OB-6, or it would end up costing something around $4,000, which I think is a rather realistic estimate. Now, how many of you would then actually yell, "Cool, finally a Prophet '08 successor for just 4 grand"?
-
One could argue that using the analog and digital ingredients developed from Prophet 12 and on gives many interesting options for new and very interesting voice architectures. One could hope for more complex voices with a larger sound palette in the coming years.
. o O ( same old rant )
-
How many of you would then actually yell, "Cool, finally a Prophet '08 successor for just 4 grand"?
Bing! I'd be more than happy to sacrifice one of my Prophet '08s to fund such an instrument. And if it was good enough, I'd sacrifice a Poly Evolver Keyboard as well. This is just the direction I've wanted to go for several years - larger analog polyphonic instruments. I've got my finger on Craigslist, ready to go!
DSI tends not to take drastic turns. They lumber along with instruments that are superb and moderately brilliant, but one kind of follows from another. They all look like members of the same family, both in appearance and on the spec sheet. Even a Prophet 12 resembles a Prophet '08. Nor are the Prophet-6 and OB-6 so odd in the line up. So don't be surprised if they don't surprise us.
-
One could argue that using the analog and digital ingredients developed from Prophet 12 and on gives many interesting options for new and very interesting voice architectures. One could hope for more complex voices with a larger sound palette in the coming years.
. o O ( same old rant )
Many ingredients have certainly been developed over the last years, but I think it's unrealistic that there's going to be anything like an Uber-Prophet in the end.
After all, a certain degree of limitation has always been an important factor for DSI's instrument design, leading to instruments that are good at particular things in order to find the right balance between features and ergonomics. If everything would be possible at the same time, the user would become overwhelmed by all the available choices. And let's not forget that there are already serious amounts of choices provided with the Prophet 12 and Pro 2.
In that sense, I'm with you and positive about new or different voice architectures in the future that could offer something neither the Prophet-6/OB-6 nor the Prophet 12/Pro 2 do.
-
After all, a certain degree of limitation has always been an important factor for DSI's instrument design......
And let's not forget that there are already serious amounts of choices provided with the Prophet 12 and Pro 2.
Yep... that sounds like spot on analysis.
-
How many of you would then actually yell, "Cool, finally a Prophet '08 successor for just 4 grand"?
If it's a Prophet'08 successor with the aforementioned features? YES! :D
It's just a couple of hundred US$ more than the Model D reissue, and less than the Voyager XL. ;)
-
How many of you would then actually yell, "Cool, finally a Prophet '08 successor for just 4 grand"?
Bing! I'd be more than happy to sacrifice one of my Prophet '08s to fund such an instrument. And if it was good enough, I'd sacrifice a Poly Evolver Keyboard as well. This is just the direction I've wanted to go for several years - larger analog polyphonic instruments. I've got my finger on Craigslist, ready to go!
Which is fine. I'm just afraid that the general response to that could be a tad different though, that's all.
DSI tends not to take drastic turns. They lumber along with instruments that are superb and moderately brilliant, but one kind of follows from another. They all look like members of the same family, both in appearance and on a spec sheet. Even a Prophet 12 resembles a Prophet '08. Nor are the Prophet-6 and OB-6 so odd in the line up. So don't be surprised if they don't surprise us.
I agree on the not too drastic turns, but there are still possible features and voice architectures that haven't been implemented yet in any of DSI's current ranges. Plus: with the entry price market being pretty much factored out by now, there's going to be less "recycling" in the way we saw it with the Prophet-Tetra-Mopho family.
The single instrument's or engine's families become smaller. The family tree of the Prophet '08 included 7 instruments/variations at its peak (Prophet '08 keyboard and module, Mopho, Mopho keyboard, Mopho SE, Mopho x4, and Tetra) while the Evolver series consisted of 4 instruments. That alone gave a different impression of not too drastic turns. None of the more recent engines (everything from 2013 on) are represented that way anymore. These days it's basically one main synth plus a desktop module version with the Pro 2 being the exception to that rule.
Also, the more recent instruments' engines are more different than their predecessor's ones. The Prophet '08 and the Evolver have much more in common in terms of features and overall structure than the Prophet 12 and the Prophet-6 for example. The latter are just further apart than the former, offering a more wide-spread diversity. With entry level priced offsprings becoming less relevant for DSI due to the current market situation, I assume that they'd rather channel their energy towards broadening their range of instruments, especially since the Prophet 12/Pro 2 and the Prophet-6/OB-6 are here to stay for a little longer.
-
How many of you would then actually yell, "Cool, finally a Prophet '08 successor for just 4 grand"?
If it's a Prophet'08 successor with the aforementioned features? YES! :D
It's just a couple of hundred US$ more than the Model D reissue, and less than the Voyager XL. ;)
Okay, maybe I was assuming a too optimistic price. ;D
-
I'm curious to learn whether DSI will adopt the new CEM3340 in an upcoming product (provided that it's VCO based). Should help bring down costs a little, esp if we're talking about a VCO based Prophet 08 successor.
-
Also, the more recent instruments' engines are more different than their predecessor's ones.
Right, but I think the P'08 and P12 are clearly related; the P12 just has more to it. The respective voice architectures share much common ground.
-
I'm curious to learn whether DSI will adopt the new CEM3340 in an upcoming product (provided that it's VCO based). Should help bring down costs a little, esp if we're talking about a VCO based Prophet 08 successor.
I don't believe this will happen.
There is too much advantage to the use of an in-house, custom design based on discrete commodity ICs and components, versus the sourcing of low-volume custom or specialty ICs such as the CEM reissues (or the Marion / DSI ICs used in the Evolver / Prophet '08, etc.). And I'd be really surprised if the issues with SSM 20xx ICs back in the Prophet-5 days would not frame the question of sourcing a core functional component from a third-party manufacturer in anything but a negative light.
Ask yourself how many fantastic-sounding, expensive polyphonic synthesizers could easily be crippled (or cannibalized) by the lack of suitable replacement ICs (or low-volume specialty components)–the Roland Jupiter-8 comes to mind, as does the OB-Xa (wonder why there are so many OB-Xas on the used market at the moment?)–and you have an answer as to why a re-issue VCO IC does not make sense for a "pro" instrument....
-
I'm curious to learn whether DSI will adopt the new CEM3340 in an upcoming product (provided that it's VCO based). Should help bring down costs a little, esp if we're talking about a VCO based Prophet 08 successor.
I don't believe this will happen.
There is too much advantage to the use of an in-house, custom design based on discrete commodity ICs and components, versus the sourcing of low-volume custom or specialty ICs such as the CEM reissues (or the Marion / DSI ICs used in the Evolver / Prophet '08, etc.). And I'd be really surprised if the issues with SSM 20xx ICs back in the Prophet-5 days would not frame the question of sourcing a core functional component from a third-party manufacturer in anything but a negative light.
Ask yourself how many fantastic-sounding, expensive polyphonic synthesizers could easily be crippled (or cannibalized) by the lack of suitable replacement ICs (or low-volume specialty components)–the Roland Jupiter-8 comes to mind, as does the OB-Xa (wonder why there are so many OB-Xas on the used market at the moment?)–and you have an answer as to why a re-issue VCO IC does not make sense for a "pro" instrument....
I don't agree with your assessment and I don't find your explanation very logical or reasonable, sorry. :)
I never mentioned the SSM20XX IC's so I don't know why you bring them up. Regarding the CEM3340 in particular - are they known to be prone to break down? And before you answer - Are you considering the age of all the instruments out there, and can you account for how they've been treated along the years, considering most of them are them are over 30 years old?
Apparently the CEM3340 was good enough for Dieter Doepfer to revive, despite the fact that he already offers various other designs of his own. :)
-
I don't agree with your assessment and I don't find your explanation very logical or reasonable, sorry. :)
I never mentioned the SSM20XX IC's so I don't know why you bring them up. Regarding the CEM3340 in particular - are they known to be prone to break down? And before you answer - Are you considering the age of all the instruments out there, and can you account for how they've been treated along the years, considering most of them are them are over 30 years old?
Apparently the CEM3340 was good enough for Dieter Doepfer to revive, despite the fact that he already offers various other designs of his own. :)
http://www.matrixsynth.com/2016/06/curtis-cem3340-vco-chips-re-issued.html
DSI wasn’t involved in the reissue and if anyone would like to find out more about it, they should contact susanonchip@covad.net directly.
I don't see any mention in there regarding a surface-mounted version–do you? For many manufacturers, that would in itself be a deal breaker. It would also constrain space in terms of board height / clearance between adjacent voice cards, compared to an all-discrete, surface-mount component design.
Also - even though these ICs might be relatively inexpensive in production quantities, wouldn't another run of the existing (Curtis-based) Marion / DSI ICs used in the Prophet '08 / Mopho simply make more sense (fewer cross-connections, shorter signal paths, less required PCB space, etc.)–especially once you consider two oscillators per voice–if your concern was the reduction of parts count?
I don't see Doepfer's requirements (single-voice, single-oscillator Eurorack modules) and DSI's (multi-voice, multi-oscillator integrated main PCBs) overlapping–do you?
I believe that there's more interest in this part from a vintage perspective, than a modern production one, especially given the fact that DSI already has at least two different in-house, discrete VCO designs to choose from–or can utilize DSP-based digital oscillators that have already been said (by Dave Smith himself) to improve upon the performance of VCOs (in general) with regard to stability / external support parts count, etc.
I'm lucky to have worked as both a service & repair technician as well as an audio products engineering consultant, so my perspective on this might be a little different–your mileage may vary. And I could very well be wrong.
-
I don't agree with your assessment and I don't find your explanation very logical or reasonable, sorry. :)
I never mentioned the SSM20XX IC's so I don't know why you bring them up. Regarding the CEM3340 in particular - are they known to be prone to break down? And before you answer - Are you considering the age of all the instruments out there, and can you account for how they've been treated along the years, considering most of them are them are over 30 years old?
Apparently the CEM3340 was good enough for Dieter Doepfer to revive, despite the fact that he already offers various other designs of his own. :)
http://www.matrixsynth.com/2016/06/curtis-cem3340-vco-chips-re-issued.html
DSI wasn’t involved in the reissue and if anyone would like to find out more about it, they should contact susanonchip@covad.net directly.
I don't see any mention in there regarding a surface-mounted version–do you? For many manufacturers, that would in itself be a deal breaker. It would also constrain space in terms of board height / clearance between adjacent voice cards, compared to an all-discrete, surface-mount component design.
Also - even though these ICs might be relatively inexpensive in production quantities, wouldn't another run of the existing (Curtis-based) Marion / DSI ICs used in the Prophet '08 / Mopho simply make more sense (fewer cross-connections, shorter signal paths, less required PCB space, etc.)–especially once you consider two oscillators per voice–if your concern was the reduction of parts count?
I don't see Doepfer's requirements (single-voice, single-oscillator Eurorack modules) and DSI's (multi-voice, multi-oscillator integrated main PCBs) overlapping–do you?
I believe that there's more interest in this part from a vintage perspective, than a modern production one, especially given the fact that DSI already has at least two different in-house, discrete VCO designs to choose from–or can utilize DSP-based digital oscillators that have already been said (by Dave Smith himself) to improve upon the performance of VCOs (in general) with regard to stability / external support parts count, etc.
I'm lucky to have worked as both a service & repair technician as well as an audio products engineering consultant, so my perspective on this might be a little different–your mileage may vary. And I could very well be wrong.
There are (almost) always solutions to a problem. There are IC Sockets etc that could be used even with SMD (should be used if you ask me), etc. For me the interesting question is whether a CEM3340 solution would be cheaper than the discrete components used in the Prophet-6/OB-6. The CEM3340 is a very nicely speced oscillator in my opinion. Since it's triangle core based it offers very clean waveforms (esp triangle and sine), and it also different forms of sync as well as linear FM.
I can't comment on if it makes more sense to use the already used "synth on a chip" again, but my perspective was from using VCO's in a Prophet 08 successor and not DCOs.
Also not sure why it matters that Doepfers oscillators are monophonic, there's an abundance of poly synths in the past from all (at the time) major players that used the CEM3340, and that ties in to my previous point.
However, I accept the possibility that using the discrete components might be cheaper than the 3340 and that space might become an issue if DSI were to use the voice board design they currently use (and they should) on both the Prophet-6 and the OB-6. :)
-
I think that the Korg Monologue (and to some extent the Minibrute) has some interesting concepts with regards to the wave shaping VCO. It would be quite cool if DSI adopted something similar for a new VCO instrument. I.e. set choices between triangle, sawtooth, and pulse, but with different shape (PW on pulse) options on each wave, and then a new switchable 2/4 pole filter with LP/BP/HP modes. This instrument could very well follow the traditional 6 voice formula for most of the part. A minimum of 2 LFO's would be great though. :)
-
Discussions about new synthesizers are invariably discussions about features. They become wish lists of multiple functions, new capabilities, and ground-breaking technology. Personally, I'm entirely content with DSI's current array of features. I'm not wishing for anything new, any technology-breaking designs. Between the Poly Evolver, Prophet '08, Prophet 12, Pro 2, Prophet-6, and OB-6, I need no additional capabilities. They're all there; the only thing that remains is composing and recording music with them. As far as I'm concerned, the research is complete and the feature set finished. I want only one thing now: the best of what has been achieved in a large musical instrument. That's all that matters to me now, all that catches and excites my imagination.
First of musical interest is the keyboard: give it five octaves, velocity, aftertouch, and a firm high-quality synthesizer-type action. As for the rest, I have no need of composing a long spec sheet. Just make the finished product large! Four oscillators (either all DCOs, all VCOs, or 2 of either with 2 digital oscillators), and then the standard DSI architecture within the '08-12 tradition. I could be happy with a dozen different feature sets, as long as the fundamentals are present. For me, size is everything.
If DSI continues to offer brilliant new designs but in the moderate-sized Prophet-6 configuration, then I'll simply remain content with my current instruments. I would love to make some changes and grow the set up a bit, but that means upsizing, not downsizing.
-
I think that the Korg Monologue (and to some extent the Minibrute) has some interesting concepts with regards to the wave shaping VCO. It would be quite cool if DSI adopted something similar for a new VCO instrument. I.e. set choices between triangle, sawtooth, and pulse, but with different shape (PW on pulse) options on each wave, and then a new switchable 2/4 pole filter with LP/BP/HP modes. This instrument could very well follow the traditional 6 voice formula for most of the part. A minimum of 2 LFO's would be great though. :)
It would have been better had Korg provided the ability to disable PWM on either oscillator of the *logue voice; as such, when modulating PW on VCO2 as pulse, the waveshape is modulated on VCO1 as saw. And I do agree that one LFO is rather limiting for modulations, without the ability to throw the second (or third!) oscillator into a keyboard-tracked/-untracked low frequency mode.
-
I would very much like to have a Pro2 in the Tempest form factor. Reason being is that I under use my Pro2 as a glorified 303 so a Pro2 module would be the perfect solution for me and free up my 2 for leads. The strength in my performances is working the Pro2 sequencer and the Tempest together in a way that isn't possible on the Tempest alone.
Imagine paraphonic patches that allow you to play/arpeggiate "16 Tunings" along side "16 Sequences" of "16 Root Notes"...with a roll function and song mode.
This would be a dynamically different instrument and not just a regurgitated keyboardless version that still requires external gear to play. You could say that the Pro2 is programming based and the Pro2 desktop is rhythm based. Better to own both. With dedicated shortcut buttons for the delay, oscillators, LFO, envelope, etc...it would not be that much of a chore to design sounds on either.
The Pro2 and Tempest are a dope combo. A hybrid of them is something that you could get extremely busy with and would be sexy as hell.
Red LED's please.
-
I would like to see another handshake between Dave Smith and John Chowning.
A pure fully fledged FM synth with knobs. Prophet FM?
How?:
All the controls for a single operator is covered on the panel, and select-buttons to toggle between each operator to edit.
The rest of the panel would cover the algorithm section (of some sort), pitch envelope, patch selection and effects.
Additional features: LED rings and button back light.
This have never existed, I would love if Dave Smith could be the first to pull this off.
A signature edition, with signature of Chowning would be awesome.
-
I would like to see another handshake between Dave Smith and John Chowning.
A pure fully fledged FM synth with knobs. Prophet FM?
How?:
All the controls for a single operator is covered on the panel, and select-buttons to toggle between each operator to edit.
The rest of the panel would cover the algorithm section (of some sort), pitch envelope, patch selection and effects.
Additional features: LED rings and button back light.
This have never existed, I would love if Dave Smith could be the first to pull this off.
A signature edition, with signature of Chowning would be awesome.
The pitch / amp envelope display itself would be a huge improvement.
-
I would like to see another handshake between Dave Smith and John Chowning.
A pure fully fledged FM synth with knobs. Prophet FM?
How?:
All the controls for a single operator is covered on the panel, and select-buttons to toggle between each operator to edit.
The rest of the panel would cover the algorithm section (of some sort), pitch envelope, patch selection and effects.
Additional features: LED rings and button back light.
This have never existed, I would love if Dave Smith could be the first to pull this off.
A signature edition, with signature of Chowning would be awesome.
The pitch / amp envelope display itself would be a huge improvement.
It would help. Though a common display for patch browsing and editing would work as well.
Maybe just an edit button to give you parameter overview for the selected operator.
-
Surprised that no one reacted to DSI's season's greetings (https://www.davesmithinstruments.com/2016/12/happy-holidays-dsi/). Probably the last hint about what's coming soon:
In fact, at this very moment we’re hard at work on some interesting new things for 2017 and beyond. In mid-January you’ll get to see the first of these.
-
Some interesting new things. I like the plural here. I wonder if effects might be in the new bundle, or perhaps another DSM module?
-
Some interesting new things. I like the plural here. I wonder if effects might be in the new bundle, or perhaps another DSM module?
As it has been confirmed already, the Eurorack modules are more or less a kind of "hobby project" for DSI. Hence, I don't believe they're necessarily part of this.
Nevertheless, we have this:
1) "some interesting new things" = definitely more than just one instrument
2) "for 2017 and beyond" = longterm plan
3) "the first of these" = might hint at something that is planned as a series, which in turn would correspond with 1) and 2)
Now, it’s still in the open whether that series (if it is indeed one) is being conceptualized as a sum of its complementary parts (= modular concept without being Eurorack), or as a new engine that is going to appear in different shapes and forms.
-
I would say, an instrument plus a series of something or other.
-
Surprised that no one reacted to DSI's season's greetings
I didn't really notice until you posted it here. Anyway, its a well known problem:
https://youtu.be/Nf_Y4MbUCLY?t=33s
Same thing with DSI and gearmas: one never knows what they do and how many right turns was involved. So personally I will just wait to see what they came up with this time around.
Anyone else noticed any changes in the party picture on social media?
-
As it has been confirmed already, the Eurorack modules are more or less a kind of "hobby project" for DSI.
And since a product is a product is a product and all takes a lot of time to develop one could hope for DSI taking their time to make an interesting smaller voice count module using their newer developed ingredients.
Not that I expect it to happen though!
-
Surprised that no one reacted to DSI's season's greetings (https://www.davesmithinstruments.com/2016/12/happy-holidays-dsi/). Probably the last hint about what's coming soon:
In fact, at this very moment we’re hard at work on some interesting new things for 2017 and beyond. In mid-January you’ll get to see the first of these.
Well spotted. This, combined with the job posting, leads me to believe that they're looking to move into something completely different (than keyboard synthesizers) within the MI / professional audio space....
-
Nevertheless, we have this:
1) "some interesting new things" = definitely more than just one instrument
2) "for 2017 and beyond" = longterm plan
3) "the first of these" = might hint at something that is planned as a series, which in turn would correspond with 1) and 2)
Now, it’s still in the open whether that series (if it is indeed one) is being conceptualized as a sum of its complementary parts (= modular concept without being Eurorack), or as a new engine that is going to appear in different shapes and forms.
There's been a market-wide trend toward semi-modular synthesizers compatible with eurorack connectors and voltage ranges (0-10v, 0-5v, -5v-5v, 1v/oct, etc). I'd say that trend more-or-less guarantees that DSI's offering will not be a semi-modular synthesizer in that mold, because that would come way too close to making dslsynth happy.
Anyway, I interpreted the phrase "the first of these" to refer to "interesting new things," without being part of a series of anything.
-
I'd say that trend more-or-less guarantees that DSI's offering will not be a semi-modular synthesizer in that mold, because that would come way too close to making dslsynth happy.
I have a clear feeling that's a core part of DSI's design philosophy!
Seriously, what I really want is a best of all so far voice architecture. What DSI does is serving multiple differently tasting slices of their technology so that they can sell multiple products. Seriously doubt that will ever change.
. o O ( :o )
-
This, combined with the job posting, leads me to believe that they're looking to move into something completely different (than keyboard synthesizers) within the MI / professional audio space....
Or it could be something as basic as realizing that they need more software development resources to keep the company running let alone trying to maintain past products. I have a clear feeling that their first priority for software development resources are new products but lets see how their offerings and maintenance evolve over time. After all one could hope for something else than Vintage Rehash Galore (TM) in the next series of product releases.
-
It would be interesting to see DSI develop a workstation with a form similar to a Synclavier or even Roland V Piano with the controls facing the player as opposed to the player leaning over the controls. It would be interesting to see an FM based Synth (although Yamaha may or may not go after that market at NAMM with the praise of FMX from the Montage) but an FM based synth with a built in sequencer (much like the Synclavier) would be pretty cool.
I think DSI is sort of in a weird place right now. Now everyone is sort of trying to get on board the vintage/analog train they need to look at expanding their horizons. They need to look at products of the past and improve on them. The problem I'm finding is a lot of the vintage gear could actually do more than the modern gear coming out (for example an OBXa can do splits and layers, the OB6 can not, the Poly Sequencers on the Prophet 5 and Prophet 10 can transpose on the fly, the Prophet 6 you can only do this by holding the record button-although this may be fixed in future OS updates).
So Behringer is now stepping into the Polysynth market. Although the DeepMind 12 is limited too it should give DSI incentive to keep moving forward. The OB6 to me was a let down as it wasn't innovative at all, just the exact same synth they released right before except with SEM insides...neat..but...that's not forward thinking. I think DSI needs to read these fourms and get feedback from their customers..which they do but if the fans want a 5 octave keyboard...give them a 5 octave keyboard. If the fans want splits and layers, give them splits and layers. Gear from the 80s logically should not be able to have more features than gear from 2016/2017...that's just mindbogglingly backwards. Things like the Alesis Andromeda or Prophet 08...that's the direction DSI should go because one of these days someone else will come along and do it instead. What is even more bizarre is they have all this feedback and direct communication with their customers online...can they not do polls? Can they not ask what we would like to see or how they can improve? There's really no reason not to.
-
I think the problem with customer surveys is that if the products you tend to offer represent a broader palette of options already, which is the case with DSI, people will start to feel entitled to ask for almost anything without constraint based on a plethora of individual needs. It's not only that too many cooks spoil the broth, it would also be impossible to make everybody happy in the end. And if you try to please too many, you'd run the risk of ending up with a workstation, where the emphasis is on "work" instead of versatility, meaning: too many options, too many functions that make sound design and the actual use complicated in the end. That's not really where the appeal of hardware lies, though.
The revival of anything analog - from instruments like the Monologue up to the reissued Minimoog - might only be partially related to the analog sound itself, which in turn is often based on personal tastes and in not to be underestimated cases on pure sentimentality. What all of these instruments have in common though, is a highly specialized range of features and sonic possibilities. In other words: I think what draws most people towards hardware - vintage or new - these days is a form of limitation as opposed to the endless possibilities you are being offered in the ITB environment. Plus: When it comes to the quantity of options alone, I don't think that you could design any hardware synth anymore that would even remotely be considered a serious contender for what you can do with just a laptop and a couple of dedicated controllers. Hence, I believe that the goal for a successful new hardware synth can't really be to fulfill a "do it all" approach. Its ease of use, a well laid out interface, and well thought out ergonomics are much more important in that regard.
As for more and more companies stepping into the analog poly synth market:
The positive side of the current situation is that it actually gives DSI the opportunity to move on while the rest is still trying to get comfortable. With regard to the Prophet '08, the Prophet-6, and the OB-6, DSI have pretty much "fulfilled their duty" on the analog polysynth market by now, so I couldn't see a better time for something completely different, which would make Behringer and the likes look like boring old farts.
-
I think the problem with customer surveys is that if the products you tend to offer represent a broader palette of options already, which is the case with DSI, people will start to feel entitled to ask for almost anything without constraint based on a plethora of individual needs. It's not only that too many cooks spoil the broth, it would also be impossible to make everybody happy in the end. And if you try to please too many, you'd run the risk of ending up with a workstation, where the emphasis is on "work" instead of versatility, meaning: too many options, too many functions that make sound design and the actual use complicated in the end. That's not really where the appeal of hardware lies, though.
The revival of anything analog - from instruments like the Monologue up to the reissued Minimoog - might only be partially related to the analog sound itself, which in turn is often based on personal tastes and in not to be underestimated cases on pure sentimentality. What all of these instruments have in common though, is a highly specialized range of features and sonic possibilities. In other words: I think what draws most people towards hardware - vintage or new - these days is a form of limitation as opposed to the endless possibilities you are being offered in the ITB environment. Plus: When it comes to the quantity of options alone, I don't think that you could design any hardware synth anymore that would even remotely be considered a serious contender for what you can do with just a laptop and a couple of dedicated controllers. Hence, I believe that the goal for a successful new hardware synth can't really be to fulfill a "do it all" approach. Its ease of use, a well laid out interface, and well thought out ergonomics are much more important in that regard.
As for more and more companies stepping into the analog poly synth market:
The positive side of the current situation is that it actually gives DSI the opportunity to move on while the rest is still trying to get comfortable. With regard to the Prophet '08, the Prophet-6, and the OB-6, DSI have pretty much "fulfilled their duty" on the analog polysynth market by now, so I couldn't see a better time for something completely different, which would make Behringer and the likes look like boring old farts.
This is a fair point. I agree that the appeal for me for my Prophet 6 is the fact everything is on the front panel with no menu diving. I think DSI should continue with that path but just expand on it. It would be interesting to see them do a synth with multiple engines (for example two Prophet 6 engines which would allow the ability to do splits and layers or have two different patches going while still not relying on menu diving). Everyone knows I'm a big fan of the ARP Quadra which had about 4 synth engines in there with no menu. Wouldn't it be awesome do have something like that from DSI? Engines can obviously be done in a smaller form as the modules have proven so why not incorporate more than one into a single synth?
I think the problem is the mentality of "Why don't you just use MIDI and a bunch of modules?" but my answer is always "Why even have a keyboard version to begin with that type of mentality?"
-
What is even more bizarre is they have all this feedback and direct communication with their customers online...can they not do polls? Can they not ask what we would like to see or how they can improve? There's really no reason not to.
I think they'd find themselves pulled in too many contradictory directions with that kind of outreach. It's safe to say that a poll would show them that everybody wants everything, and it would fall to DSI to decide how to weigh the input, which would mean they're following whatever inner muse guides them in the first place. They could therefore leave out the unnecessary step of doing a poll.
-
Things like the Alesis Andromeda or Prophet 08...that's the direction DSI should go because one of these days someone else will come along and do it instead.
This is fine music to my ears, but only time will tell. I think 2017 - and perhaps NAMM itself - will tell us more than merely what synthesizer DSI will offer us next. I think we will learn the direction the company will be taking in general in the future - whether it be more of the same, or substantially different and innovative. I may be completely wrong about this - and I hope I am - but the whole Prophet analog poly synth theme seems to be exhausted. How many variations on a theme can be produced? So, I would expect to see something quite new this year.
Contrary to all business sense, I don't care for the regular replacing of old instruments with new instruments. I would much prefer if DSI would perfect and maintain a small number and variety of instruments. This would include the MK II approach of producing developments of instruments that build on what has already been, improving and expanding on the original foundation. Oh, for a Prophet '08 MK II with a better keyboard, a few onboard effects, longer envelope times, a high pass filter, and a few other features! Of course, it's a fact that Dave Smith is not a MK II kind of guy.
But no, things must move on and change must be constant. This may be good for business and for creating more synth demos, but not for good music. Regardless, I think NAMM will be a telling event, and 2017 in general.
-
Contrary to all business sense, I don't care for the regular replacing of old instruments with new instruments. I would much prefer if DSI would perfect and maintain a small number and variety of instruments.
This isn't an unheard-of business plan. Shure has been making the SM58 microphone for 50 years, the Fender Stratocaster has been around since 1954. In the synth realm, Buchla has been making the 259 complex oscillator for at least 35 years. These things change form over time, implement new technologies and manufacturing trends, but remain functionally pretty much the same. It's probably really hard, because they have to adapt to slow supply chain changes over a long period of time, but I think there's a lot to admire about that.
-
Things like the Alesis Andromeda or Prophet 08...that's the direction DSI should go because one of these days someone else will come along and do it instead.
This is fine music to my ears, but only time will tell. I think 2017 - and perhaps NAMM itself - will tell us more than merely what synthesizer DSI will offer us next. I think we will learn the direction the company will be taking in general in the future - whether it be more of the same, or substantially different and innovative. I may be completely wrong about this - and I hope I am - but the whole Prophet analog poly synth theme seems to be exhausted. How many variations on a theme can be produced? So, I would expect to see something quite new this year.
Contrary to all business sense, I don't care for the regular replacing of old instruments with new instruments. I would much prefer if DSI would perfect and maintain a small number and variety of instruments. This would include the MK II approach of producing developments of instruments that build on what has already been, improving and expanding on the original foundation. Oh, for a Prophet '08 MK II with a better keyboard, a few onboard effects, longer envelope times, a high pass filter, and a few other features! Of course, it's a fact that Dave Smith is not a MK II kind of guy.
But no, things must move on and change must be constant. This may be good for business and for creating more synth demos, but not for good music. Regardless, I think NAMM will be a telling event, and 2017 in general.
See I think the Prophet line CAN be expanded but the problem is it's not. Before Sequential took the Prophet and expanded it with a bunch of incarnations...the Prophet 10, Prophet VS, Prophet 2000 etc...so why not now? Like I posted above why not 2 synth engines on one synth? Why not 4? Why not an analog/sampler hybrid? Why not an FM or VS based Prophet? The OB6 to me was absolutely disappointing because it was laziness instead of innovation. I mean it didn't even increase the polyphony from their last synth that had just came out! Come on. It's has nothing to do with having more features..it has to do with having each instrument have it's own identity and I really hope it's not a sign of things to come. I don't need another Prophet 6 with a negligibly different sound. I want something different.
-
Contrary to all business sense, I don't care for the regular replacing of old instruments with new instruments. I would much prefer if DSI would perfect and maintain a small number and variety of instruments.
This isn't an unheard-of business plan. Shure has been making the SM58 microphone for 50 years, the Fender Stratocaster has been around since 1954. In the synth realm, Buchla has been making the 259 complex oscillator for at least 35 years. These things change form over time, implement new technologies and manufacturing trends, but remain functionally pretty much the same. It's probably really hard, because they have to adapt to slow supply chain changes over a long period of time, but I think there's a lot to admire about that.
But even Fender Stratocasters have different configurations, different pickups, different necks, different hardware. 3 strats may still be strats but each has it's own purpose and features. Even a keyboard with a different pitch/mod wheel (similar to the OBXa where you could bend the pitch of individual oscillators as opposed to both) would be welcome cause it would be different.
-
Of course, it's a fact that Dave Smith is not a MK II kind of guy.
Occasionally he is (see Prophet-6). It only takes about 37 years. ;D
-
Of course, it's a fact that Dave Smith is not a MK II kind of guy.
Occasionally he is (see Prophet-6). It only takes about 37 years. ;D
I guess I never thought of a Prophet-6 as a Prophet 5 MK II. I would prefer that MK II's be expansions of the original instrument, rather than shrinkings of it. I suppose the P-6 has some additional features, but the keyboard size is a great disappointment.
I honestly think the Prophet '08 is the exceptional synthesizer in the whole DSI/Sequential line up. ...What was that? Oh, my Poly Evolver Keyboard just spat. Attitude. Anyways, I do think the Prophet '08 deserves to remain a standard instrument in the DSI catalog, one that is not tossed aside for the latest new synthesizer. It should be followed by an instrument that is clearly its successor, truly a P'08 MK II.
-
Anyways, I do think the Prophet '08 deserves to remain a standard instrument in the DSI catalog, one that is not tossed aside for the latest new synthesizer.
You've all but guaranteed a Prophet 16 that is essentially a Prophet 8 x 2 with extra bells and whistles.
-
Dave Smith said he'd never make a two-manual Prophet '08. And he also said he'd never make a VCO synth. :o
A Prophet 16? I'll have four, please.
-
Actually, Shaw, you have a point. Life at DSI seems to be a numbers game, and a Prophet 16 would be the next natural step.
-
See I think the Prophet line CAN be expanded but the problem is it's not. Before Sequential took the Prophet and expanded it with a bunch of incarnations...the Prophet 10, Prophet VS, Prophet 2000 etc...so why not now?
But DSI did release the Prophet '08, the Prophet 12, and the Prophet-6, which are all very different. So it's not really that we haven't seen any Prophet incarnations in the more recent past. Even the Poly Evolver and the MEK have once been advertised (around 2006) as continuing the story of the Prophet-5 and the Pro-One.
Like I posted above why not 2 synth engines on one synth? Why not 4? Why not an analog/sampler hybrid? Why not an FM or VS based Prophet?
While some of that would probably be possible, it has never been part of DSI's philosophy to design one synth that can do it all. Even the ARP Quadra you were referring to earlier wasn't that kind of synth. In fact, it wasn't even a true polyphonic synth like all the Prophets are, since it utilized divide down technology to achieve polyphony like organs, the many string machines, and the Polymoog. Its synth engine was also not immensely powerful. But even if you upgrade all that to today's standards and expectations, you'd probably end up with a quite expensive piece of gear. So from that perspective I do get it if DSI suggests (by their range of products) to simply get the Prophet 12, the Prophet-6, an Evolver, and a Prophet '08 if you want all these aspects combined for example. Of course that's still very different from having it all combined under one roof so to speak. But I assume that if you'd combine 3-4 different engines you might also have to pay at least 2-3 times the price you'd usually pay for one rather specialized synth, especially if analog is involved all along the signal path. And the other risk is that you can also overload a synth's engine, especially if you are forced to rely too much on menu diving in the end.
The OB6 to me was absolutely disappointing because it was laziness instead of innovation. I mean it didn't even increase the polyphony from their last synth that had just came out! Come on. It's has nothing to do with having more features..it has to do with having each instrument have it's own identity and I really hope it's not a sign of things to come. I don't need another Prophet 6 with a negligibly different sound. I want something different.
While the OB-6 was obviously not for you, it was never advertised as the most innovative synth. It was mostly based on a rather spontaneous idea by Dave and Tom. By following through with their idea, they've made the first analog polyphonic Oberheim synth available since the 1980s. And for many players that was already enough, as it introduced variety to the poly synth market and something people were lusting after for years. And that's okay too.
Plus: That each DSI instrument is supposed to have its own identity is no sign of things to come, it has always been that way, ever since the Evolver was introduced. Also: Isn't it in general one instrument's identity that attracts us to a specific synth, a guitar, or whatever instrument?
-
One of my favorite advertisements:
-
One of my favorite advertisements:
Exactly. That's the one I was referring to.
-
My absolutely perfect synthesizer would be a Prophet '08, but with:
- four stereo DCOs
- sixteen voices
- onboard stereo delay and chorus
- high pass resonant filter
- longer attack, delay, and release times in all three envelopes
- higher quality keyboard
- modulation wheels to left of keyboard
This would be my dream synthesizer.
-
That synth sounds perfect to me too, except it would need two LPFs and HPFs per voice, right? Isn't the large part of the expense in the filters?
I'd add that the stereo delay can just be the Prophet 12 delay setup.
Also 16 modulation slots.
Yeah!
-
That synth sounds perfect to me too, except it would need two LPFs and HPFs per voice, right? Isn't the large part of the expense in the filters?
It would need twice of everything in the analog signal path, yes. Add to that 64 DCOs. :o
I'd add that the stereo delay can just be the Prophet 12 delay setup.
Not sure if that's something that can be implemented by just swapping it around, as the Prophet 12 is not based on a true stereo signal path, where everything's hard-wired to the left and the right. On the other hand the delays have been used on the Evolver already (albeit not exactly the same ones), so I guess it wouldn't be a huge problem. One thing to consider though: The delays of the Prophet 12 are not like the effects on the Prophet-6/OB-6, which I think was what Sacred Synthesis had in mind. Instead, they're fully embedded in the modulation matrix.
-
By "stereo" I was referring only to the hardwiring of the oscillators to separate channels, as with the Evolver.
-
As an alternative to stereo oscillators, there is always the Output B option on the Prophet '08's back panel. With sixteen voices, one could afford to leave the instrument in that configuration, producing an fully stereo eight voice instrument.
-
As an alternative to stereo oscillators, there is always the Output B option on the Prophet '08's back panel. With sixteen voices, one could afford to leave the instrument in that configuration, producing an fully stereo eight voice instrument.
If you say "stereo oscillators", does that mean that you originally wanted 4 DCOs on each side or 2x2 like on the Evolver? Only in the latter case, it would already need 64 DCOs and twice as many otherwise.
Compared to that, the Schmidt synthesizer "only" uses 32 DCOs (4x8), albeit they are a bit more complex just as this synth is of course a bit more complex as a whole. With its multitimbrality features (8 times), it certainly comes closest to what LoboLives was getting at - in the analog realm that is.
-
As in the Evolver.
-
I've never played an Evolver. Can you make different program changes for each side? In other words, is it essentially a different patch Right side to Left side or the same patch? I'm wondering if there would still be some advantages of having a separate module/synthesizer on each side.
-
I've never played an Evolver. Can you make different program changes for each side? In other words, is it essentially a different patch Right side to Left side or the same patch? I'm wondering if there would still be some advantages of having a separate module/synthesizer on each side.
No it's not duotimbral along the stereo image. It's just that each kind of oscillator (one analog, one digital) is hard-wired to the left and the right channel and that it has two filters, one for each channel. That is not to be confused with different patches to the left and the right. Everything you adjust on the Evolver takes place within one patch. You can layer sounds on the Poly Evolver, but that has nothing to do with the true stereo signal path.
-
One of my favorite advertisements:
Why do synthesizers always fly through space in ads?
-
One of my favorite advertisements:
Why do synthesizers always fly through space in ads?
Because
a) Cats
b) Space is the place
c) LSD
-
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/28/e9/61/28e9613a335a44a2f5be93804da67647.jpg)
-
Three synthesizers flying through space:
-
I corrected that for you…
-
A catzesizer!? https://youtu.be/SUKJA4UAruw?t=6m20s ;-)
-
A catzesizer!? https://youtu.be/SUKJA4UAruw?t=6m20s ;-)
Ha! I remember sitting at my desk once, playing around with the Dexed plug-in just over my laptop speakers. At one point, I produced a meow sound and my girlfriend's cat would freak out any time I'd press a key. Sadly though, that was the only time she ever reacted to any of my sounds - the cat that is.
To come back to the relation between synthesizers and space, which might also be relevant for the next DSI instrument:
I think that the use of the ARP 2500 as a means to communicate with aliens in "Close Encounters" probably played a great role as a cultural signifier.
-
Ha! I remember sitting at my desk once, playing around with the Dexed plug-in just over my laptop speakers. At one point, I produced a meow sound and my girlfriend's cat would freak out any time I'd press a key. Sadly though, that was the only time she ever reacted to any of my sounds - the cat that is.
Ever tried bird call synthesis? ;)
-
Ha! I remember sitting at my desk once, playing around with the Dexed plug-in just over my laptop speakers. At one point, I produced a meow sound and my girlfriend's cat would freak out any time I'd press a key. Sadly though, that was the only time she ever reacted to any of my sounds - the cat that is.
Ever tried bird call synthesis? ;)
No, but I used to get into call and response games with cardinals by true analog whistling.
-
No, but I used to get into call and response games with cardinals by true analog whistling.
Some of them sounds almost like a LFO bird:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_cardinal#Song
That would make a wave table synthesizer or sample synthesizer even more interesting (for cats too).
-
No, but I used to get into call and response games with cardinals by true analog whistling.
Some of them sounds almost like a LFO bird:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_cardinal#Song
They're cool birds. I do really miss them.
-
They're cool birds. I do really miss them.
Not to worry: give your Pro 2 a try! . o O ( fake beaks )
-
I've always understood the synthesizer-space relationship as coming from a shared modernity. The synthesizer is a recently invented instrument that uses modern technology to produce sound. Space is that domain of modern exploration the depends entirely on technology. Both are heavily reliant on computers; hence, the relationship. It makes sense to me.
-
Here you go, on Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, etc.: http://www.catsonsynthesizersinspace.com/
-
But the cat portion all started here:
-
So, anyone else seen this yet?
https://www.reddit.com/r/synthesizers/comments/5n3elu/saw_this_on_peter_dyers_instagram_story_new_dave/
-
Yes.
-
One more week!
-
The printed DSI logo on their boxes is not very large. So if the box is placed on the floor, the table in the background might indicate that it could be a 61 keys instrument. Anyway, I don't wanna get too ridiculous about making guesses based on boxes.
-
Two short and very recent interviews with Dave:
http://www.bboytechreport.com/2017/01/09/exclusive-namm-tec-awards-interview-dave-smith-of-dave-smith-instruments/
http://www.musicconnection.com/chats-synth-developer-dave-smith/
So one more announcement later this year, and more and more synths in general.
-
Watch DSI's social media for hints, any day now.
-
"We have no set of rules when we select our next project, so our customers can always expect the unexpected."
- Dave Smith
Music Connection interviewer: "What's next for you and your company?"
Dave Smith: "More synths! We have another major announcement at NAMM, and we’re planning another surprise later in the year."
-
Watch DSI's social media for hints, any day now.
This was just posted. Doesn't really help, does it?
(https://scontent.ftxl1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/15895416_1443744788983714_2229775669261210604_n.jpg?oh=222eee94286ee9382893d8d1311f7972&oe=5917E376)
-
This was just posted. Doesn't really help, does it?
What synth is that he has his hands on... that info may help tremendously.
-
That picture is a subtle hint that the new instrument will have MIDI. :D
I believe it's either a Roland Jupiter 8 or a Jupiter 6.
-
This was just posted. Doesn't really help, does it?
What synth is that he has his hands on... that info may help tremendously.
Jupiter-6 (which was connected to a Prophet-600).
-
That picture is a subtle hint that the new instrument will have MIDI. :D
Hear, hear.
-
That picture is clearly a subtle hint that the new instrument will have MIDI. :D
I believe it's either a Roland Jupiter 8 or a Jupiter 6.
A collaboration perhaps?
-
That picture is clearly a subtle hint that the new instrument will have MIDI. :D
I believe it's either a Roland Jupiter 8 or a Jupiter 6.
A collaboration perhaps?
MIDI 4.0.
-
That picture is clearly a subtle hint that the new instrument will have MIDI. :D
I believe it's either a Roland Jupiter 8 or a Jupiter 6.
A collaboration perhaps?
MIDI 4.0.
sounds logical... the Prophet 600 was the first synth to make good use of MIDI
-
That was meant to be a joke though. But I'd take the Sequential jacket!
-
That was meant to be a joke though. But I'd take the Sequential jacket!
In all seriousness, MIDI is getting long in the tooth. Modern computers and processors are capable of much greater precision.
-
The Sequential jacket was worn by John Bowen btw.
Sooo many possible hints!
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/mind_blown.gif)
-
The Sequential jacket was worn by John Bowen btw.
Sooo many possible hints!
Collaborations Galore....
-
Ah, I think I got it: The next synth will sound so harsh and cold that you will need a good ol' Sequential jacket to keep yourself warm. ;D
-
If the Sequential Jacket is the hint, DSI has a lot of old products to revive: Prophet 600, Fugue, Max, Prophet 2000, TOM, among many others...
... or perhaps it's not a hint at all. It could just be a walk down memory lane from a previous NAMM or trade show.
-
Another question is, will the new instrument be a DSI or a Sequential synthesizer? Could the Roland connection suggest a Sequential instrument (regarding how Dave was given back the name)?
-
The Sequential jacket was worn by John Bowen btw.
Sooo many possible hints!
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/mind_blown.gif)
If there's anything to it, a collaboration between the maker of the Prophet 12 and the maker of the Solaris could be very interesting. But I suspect more the collaboration - if there is one - would be with Roland.
-
That picture is a subtle hint that the new instrument will have MIDI. :D
Damn it!
-
How about USB-C ports only. ;D
USB-C to CV adapter anyone?
-
But there may be several things on the way, Chysn, so don't give up.
-
But there may be several things on the way, Chysn, so don't give up.
Oh, I'll be excited about whatever. I don't expect to see The Synth Jason Would Make because it's both too close to something they already have and too radically different from anything there's ever been.
I'd like to see the Sequential brand name taken for a spin again, because I love the look of the Prophet 6.
-
I'd like to see the Sequential brand name taken for a spin again, because I love the look of the Prophet 6.
Ditto, if they would only push the Sequential architecture a little further.
If I remember correctly, you came close to buying a Prophet-6 Keyboard, but then you decided to go modular instead.
-
It's obviously going to be a 360 degree keyboard.
-
It's obviously going to be a 360 degree keyboard.
Haha! So the next thing is going to be a laser harp.
-
Ditto, if they would only push the Sequential architecture a little further.
If I remember correctly, you came close to buying a Prophet-6 Keyboard, but then you decided to go modular instead.
Yeah, and modular sort of took me by surprise. Things that I once considered essential, I don't care about anymore. PWM, ASDR envelopes, LFOs, filters. What's a synthesizer without these things? But now that I find myself on the verge of going full-Buchla, I'm not sure how that squares with looking for a keyboard synthesizer, or even keeping the one I have.
For the price (and ongoing investments) of my modular, I could have had a Minimoog or a Prophet 6. I sort of wipe my brow with relief that I didn't get a Minimoog, but I don't feel that way about the Prophet 6. It would have been an equally satisfying path, but way different.
I would seriously consider a Sequential monosynth with good CV support, even if it means scaling down the modular and building another case. But I think that the Pro 2 is that synth right now, and it's hard to beat. For the record, I don't consider its CV support sufficient (please see the Oberheim TVP for one operational definition of "sufficient"). And everyone's right; it's time for a new five-octave replacement for the Prophet 08.
-
I always thought the Sequential name was with Yamaha, not Roland? I swear I heard Dave mention he got it back from Yamaha in an interview.
In any case I thought Dave said he wouldn't be interested in collaborations anymore after the OB6. Perhaps he changed his mind? I remember him saying he'd never make a synth again with VCOs but he eventually did so perhaps he's more interested in expanding DSI's horizons.
As far as the suggestions go
John Bowen and Dave Smith collaborating would be neat. With the digital aspect of the Solaris perhaps we'll indeed see a Prophet VS type synth which would be more than welcomed. It certainly needs to be multi-timbral if that's the case. The downfall of the Solaris is you can't play more than one patch at a time which at that price point and as deep as that synth is a bit silly.
As far as a DSI/Roland collaboration....Jupiter 10? An 10 voice, VCO analog synth with splits and layers possibilities? Yes please.
-
I always thought the Sequential name was with Yamaha, not Roland? I swear I heard Dave mention he got it back from Yamaha in an interview.
In any case I thought Dave said he wouldn't be interested in collaborations anymore after the OB6. Perhaps he changed his mind? I remember him saying he'd never make a synth again with VCOs but he eventually did so perhaps he's more interested in expanding DSI's horizons.
As far as the suggestions go
John Bowen and Dave Smith collaborating would be neat. With the digital aspect of the Solaris perhaps we'll indeed see a Prophet VS type synth which would be more than welcomed. It certainly needs to be multi-timbral if that's the case. The downfall of the Solaris is you can't play more than one patch at a time which at that price point and as deep as that synth is a bit silly.
As far as a DSI/Roland collaboration....Jupiter 10? An 10 voice, VCO analog synth with splits and layers possibilities? Yes please.
Roland has already collaborated with Malekko on the Roland-branded System-500, so they're likely not averse to the idea....
-
I always thought the Sequential name was with Yamaha, not Roland? I swear I heard Dave mention he got it back from Yamaha in an interview.
That's correct. However, it was Roland's founder Ikutaro Kakehashi who kindly asked Yamaha to give the rights back to Dave.
In any case I thought Dave said he wouldn't be interested in collaborations anymore after the OB6. Perhaps he changed his mind? I remember him saying he'd never make a synth again with VCOs but he eventually did so perhaps he's more interested in expanding DSI's horizons.
I'd assume the latter as well. With DSI focussing less on covering the whole market from low cost instruments (like the Mopho, Evolver desktop, or the Tetra) to more expensive ones, I guess that there are going to be more kind of "flagship" synths, which would have to result in more variety.
As far as the suggestions go
John Bowen and Dave Smith collaborating would be neat. With the digital aspect of the Solaris perhaps we'll indeed see a Prophet VS type synth which would be more than welcomed. It certainly needs to be multi-timbral if that's the case. The downfall of the Solaris is you can't play more than one patch at a time which at that price point and as deep as that synth is a bit silly.
As far as a DSI/Roland collaboration....Jupiter 10? An 10 voice, VCO analog synth with splits and layers possibilities? Yes please.
As far as collaborations go, Dave Rossum would be a good candidate as well - and rather more compelling if I may say so. Not so sure about Roland, as they seem to be happy with their ACB technology and plug-out platform. A true analog instrument might only undermine that approach. I also assume that we won't see more instruments like the Prophet-6 and the OB-6 as far as re-imagined classics go. Mainly because I think that DSI can truly shine with more innovative (not meant in a judgemental sense here) approaches in the current market situation – along the lines of: Let others dwell in the past, we will show the rest that we can still push boundaries.
-
I always thought the Sequential name was with Yamaha, not Roland? I swear I heard Dave mention he got it back from Yamaha in an interview.
In any case I thought Dave said he wouldn't be interested in collaborations anymore after the OB6. Perhaps he changed his mind? I remember him saying he'd never make a synth again with VCOs but he eventually did so perhaps he's more interested in expanding DSI's horizons.
As far as the suggestions go
John Bowen and Dave Smith collaborating would be neat. With the digital aspect of the Solaris perhaps we'll indeed see a Prophet VS type synth which would be more than welcomed. It certainly needs to be multi-timbral if that's the case. The downfall of the Solaris is you can't play more than one patch at a time which at that price point and as deep as that synth is a bit silly.
As far as a DSI/Roland collaboration....Jupiter 10? An 10 voice, VCO analog synth with splits and layers possibilities? Yes please.
Roland has already collaborated with Malekko on the Roland-branded System-500, so they're likely not averse to the idea....
They've already touched on the analog realm with the JDXA. So I don't think it would be too far of a stretch.
-
For what it's worth, Ikutaro Kakehashi retired from Roland in 2013 and went on to create ATV.
-
They've already touched on the analog realm with the JDXA. So I don't think it would be too far of a stretch.
... and that was the dud of the decade. Terrible layout with all the menu diving via only two buttons: [<] & [>]
-
They've already touched on the analog realm with the JDXA. So I don't think it would be too far of a stretch.
... and that was the dud of the decade. Terrible layout with all the menu diving via only two buttons: [<] & [>]
I hear ya. Lots of flaws with that one. Great concept though combining real analog sound with sample/digital based sounds just wish they thought things through. Roland's new layout on their synths (Red on black) is mind bogglingly stupid. Even in direct sunlight I'm struggling to read my FA-08's panel. The JDXA can get some incredible sounds but it just takes longer than it should to get them. I found I spent more time menu diving and trying to set the thing up rather than playing it. I'm all for programming but it just seemed like it was the wrong layout for the right engine.
-
They've already touched on the analog realm with the JDXA. So I don't think it would be too far of a stretch.
... and that was the dud of the decade. Terrible layout with all the menu diving via only two buttons: [<] & [>]
I hear ya. Lots of flaws with that one. Great concept though combining real analog sound with sample/digital based sounds just wish they thought things through. Roland's new layout on their synths (Red on black) is mind bogglingly stupid. Even in direct sunlight I'm struggling to read my FA-08's panel. The JDXA can get some incredible sounds but it just takes longer than it should to get them. I found I spent more time menu diving and trying to set the thing up rather than playing it. I'm all for programming but it just seemed like it was the wrong layout for the right engine.
I think the JD-XA would have really benefitted from a better interface design. As it is, it's really a bit counter-intuitive. Another aspect that's annoying about recent Roland offerings is the obvious cost cutting philosophy. Their keyboards feel really bad and on the System-8 you don't even get Aftertouch. This video by Markus Fuller (far OT, I know) is really revealing in that regard: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4tVgLlwekk
-
I always thought the Sequential name was with Yamaha, not Roland? I swear I heard Dave mention he got it back from Yamaha in an interview.
Weren't both Yamaha and Roland involved? Someone called someone, and the end result was that Dave was given back the Sequential name. The information is in the NAMM videos introducing the Prophet-6.
-
I always thought the Sequential name was with Yamaha, not Roland? I swear I heard Dave mention he got it back from Yamaha in an interview.
Weren't both Yamaha and Roland involved? Someone called someone, and the end result was that Dave was given back the Sequential name. The information is in the NAMM videos introducing the Prophet-6.
Like I said, it was Roland's founder Ikutaro Kakehashi who kindly asked Yamaha to give the rights back to Dave. Kakehashi moved on from Roland though to found the ATV corporation in 2014. Or to quote from the Prophet-6 manual:
Event two transpired when, unknown to me, my old friend and collaborator in the creation of MIDI, Ikutaro Kakehashi, founder of Roland, asked Yamaha Corporation to consider returning ownership of my original company brand, Sequential Circuits, to me. (Yamaha had purchased Sequential’s assets when we closed shop back in 1987.) Yamaha generously agreed and suddenly Sequential was back — almost. All we needed was an awesome new product to bear the name.
-
I always thought the Sequential name was with Yamaha, not Roland? I swear I heard Dave mention he got it back from Yamaha in an interview.
Weren't both Yamaha and Roland involved? Someone called someone, and the end result was that Dave was given back the Sequential name. The information is in the NAMM videos introducing the Prophet-6.
Like I said, it was Roland's founder Ikutaro Kakehashi who kindly asked Yamaha to give the rights back to Dave. Kakehashi moved on from Roland though to found the ATV corporation in 2014. Or to quote from the Prophet-6 manual:
Event two transpired when, unknown to me, my old friend and collaborator in the creation of MIDI, Ikutaro Kakehashi, founder of Roland, asked Yamaha Corporation to consider returning ownership of my original company brand, Sequential Circuits, to me. (Yamaha had purchased Sequential’s assets when we closed shop back in 1987.) Yamaha generously agreed and suddenly Sequential was back — almost. All we needed was an awesome new product to bear the name.
Wonder why he only had the name Sequential and not Sequential Circuits on the Prophet 6.
-
Wonder why he only had the name Sequential and not Sequential Circuits on the Prophet 6.
From 1985 on Sequential Circuits Inc. abbreviated their name to Sequential, simply because it's shorter and easier to use. The shortened name was printed on products like the MAX, TOM, Multitrak, Split-Eight/Pro 8, Prophet 2000/2002, Prophet VS, Studio 440, and the Prophet 3000. So the reason is pretty banal really. By picking up the shortened version of the name for the Prophet-6, they also indicated continuity rather than just harking back. So using the name as it was actually used the last time around sort of resembles taking up where one left off.
-
Man they run a pretty tight ship eh? Zero leaks.
-
Wonder why he only had the name Sequential and not Sequential Circuits on the Prophet 6.
From 1985 on Sequential Circuits Inc. abbreviated their name to Sequential, simply because it's shorter and easier to use. The shortened name was printed on products like the MAX, TOM, Multitrak, Split-Eight/Pro 8, Prophet 2000/2002, Prophet VS, Studio 440, and the Prophet 3000. So the reason is pretty banal really. By picking up the shortened version of the name for the Prophet-6, they also indicated continuity rather than just harking back. So using the name as it was actually used the last time around sort of resembles taking up where one left off.
Makes sense. Thanks. :)
-
Man they run a pretty tight ship eh? Zero leaks.
Anticipation is half the fun. Plus: They've gotta put some effort into making all gear-related sites break down again on Thursday.
-
Man they run a pretty tight ship eh? Zero leaks.
Other than those pictures they posted of a box and of them demonstrating MIDI back in the day (Along with John Bowen and I believe Ikutaro Kakehashi) by connecting a Prophet 600 to (From what I believe was reported) a Juno.
So I'm not sure what any of this means. Dave said he wasn't really going to be doing collaborations again (like he did with Tom Oberheim for the OB6) but like we discussed earlier he also said he would never do a VCO based synth again but then BOOM Prophet 6 and OB6. So...who knows. Maybe a new digital Prophet synth alongside John Bowen? A new product with Kakehashi? A partnership with Roland? Who knows.
Personally I'd like to see a partnership with Cameron Jones in creating a new Synclavier type FM synth with real time sampling and real time sequencing capabilities of the original with a layout like the Minimoog/Schmidt where the panel has the option to be place in front of the musician. Not sure how that would happen though.
Perhaps a new Sequential Multi-Track?
-
I think that picture from the 1983 NAMM might be completely unrelated to any new product. Just a sort of legacy reminder, like: "It's NAMM time again next week. Remember how Sequential and Roland introduced MIDI back in the day?" It's just one of those iconic NAMM pictures Sequential/DSI is related to.
I'm skeptical with regard to a new collaboration as well. Sure, never say never. But at the same time it has been emphasized quite often that DSI have been collecting many ideas over the years and that they are continuously thinking about new stuff, which may just turn those kinds of projects into priorities.
Let's also not forget that the last instrument, the OB-6, didn't require much R&D time. It was a rather quick and easy process (6 months in total), so who knows where their heads have been in the meantime. What I'm saying is: With that little bit of extra time on their hands thanks to the OB-6 project, they might just have had enough time to develop something that is going to be substantially different from all the prior releases.
-
I think that picture from the 1983 NAMM might be completely unrelated to any new product. Just a sort of legacy reminder, like: "It's NAMM time again next week. Remember how Sequential and Roland introduced MIDI back in the day?" It's just one of those iconic NAMM pictures Sequential/DSI is related to.
I'm skeptical with regard to a new collaboration as well. Sure, never say never. But at the same time it has been emphasized quite often that DSI have been collecting many ideas over the years and that they are continuously thinking about new stuff, which may just turn those kinds of projects into priorities.
Let's also not forget that the last instrument, the OB-6, didn't require much R&D time. It was a rather quick and easy process (6 months in total), so who knows where their heads have been in the meantime. What I'm saying is: With that little bit of extra time on their hands thanks to the OB-6 project, they might just have had enough time to develop something that is going to be substantially different from all the prior releases.
Just going to have to wait and see. I just hope it's not a letdown.
-
Man they run a pretty tight ship eh? Zero leaks.
Maybe invite them on a dinner to a Mexican restaurant? ;)
. o O ( :o )
-
I think that picture from the 1983 NAMM might be completely unrelated to any new product. Just a sort of legacy reminder....
I would agree with this. I don't think we've been given a hint yet, even though we're eager to get one. I'd be very surprised to see collaboration with anyone other than Tom Oberheim.
-
Personally I have decided just to wait and see what they announce this time around. Hopefully the new machine will have interesting new ingredients in its voice architecture. And for the record: I don't expect it to be a machine to my liking but fingers crossed for something of interest one of these NAMM shows.
Far more interesting is to see how DSI evolves their operation now that they have more software developers in their workshop. More bug fixes? More complex products? Multiple development tracks whereby more than one instrument is being worked on at the same time?
-
The keyboard/module, and 'size of keyboard' conversation is very interesting. There has definitely been an evolution away from linear 88-key controllers towards smaller keybeds, and alternate devices for midi input. A new DSI synth would have to offer a compelling set of controller features for me to invest in anything but a module.
In 1991 I sold my baby grand, and bought my first master controller - a fire-engine-red DPM C8. It is still my go-to keyboard. In 2011 I had to send the DPM motherboard to Peavey for repairs, and bought the Nero White master controller - which is a lot more portable!
Next up was a guitar midi controller... I worked for Fishman on their TriplePlay wireless midi controller and stomp box. In this case the fretboard becomes a control surface. Lots of fun, and also why I have a few DAWs listed in my signature - the need to test with a variety of popular tools...
My next gear update was the Push 2, which is fascinating in that it allows both fretboard, and linear keyboard controller styles of play - along with excellent sequencing and sample editing.
Where am I going with this? I believe many of us who are willing/able to invest in boutique synths already have a number of master controllers and alternate input devices. I don't have space, or need in my studio for another full-sized keyboard. At some point I will get a Roli-like device to explore the additional dimensions, but I think that market has not yet reached a sweet spot.
At this point I'm just not sure I need anything else! Between what's available as synth software in the box (Macbook Pro), a new external hardware synth will have to provide a sound I just can't get from my P12. So far - I haven't hit that wall. :)
Thoughts?
-
The keyboard/module, and 'size of keyboard' conversation is very interesting. There has definitely been an evolution away from linear 88-key controllers towards smaller keybeds, and alternate devices for midi input.
I think there are basically two current trends: One is about portability, the other one about alternative input devices that are able to offer a more expressive articulation. While the former one is mostly based on sheer practical concerns by touring musicians or those who perform live frequently, the latter one is about more fundamental questions of musical expressivity, especially since the keyboard (based on the organ, not the piano) is a rather primitive on/off switch device.
A new DSI synth would have to offer a compelling set of controller features for me to invest in anything but a module.
With regard to alternative input devices and controllers, a welcomed feature for not only a brandnew instrument would certainly be MPE support.
I believe many of us who are willing/able to invest in boutique synths already have a number of master controllers and alternate input devices. I don't have space, or need in my studio for another full-sized keyboard. At some point I will get a Roli-like device to explore the additional dimensions, but I think that market has not yet reached a sweet spot.
That's a valid point. With a certain amount of gear already present, one would not need more and more keyboards along with every new synth engine. However, people also tend to sell stuff in order to buy new instruments. So there's not necessarily a growing number of keyboards in every case; not everyone can afford to be a collector, and not everybody wants a plethora of synths, but rather a limited selection of reliable tools (depending on personal goals), of which one can only use so many in depth anyway. And then there are those for whom a new synth is only a true instrument if it is a self-contained unit with an appropriate input device/keyboard, which also makes sense, especially if you don't wanna carry around lots of different devices all the time, which could as well be included in one box.
I'm not sure about whether the market has not yet reached a sweet spot yet. There are as many alternative controllers around like never before and one could even make a joke about how many new kickstarter campaigns for whatever kind of controller have been started this week. There's definitely an extreme differentiation going on with more and more specialized controllers that come in all variations - from building blocks to ROLI-like approaches and even apps. I would agree with you insofar, as some projects appear really forced, or just as a slight variation of another product. All the rest might be tied to the question, whether there is anything like a perfect controller or input device. I'd answer that question with 'no', since each one of us has different goals and techniques in mind. So the whole controller market is one for highly individualized needs. Some controllers offer different modes of operation in order to cover different approaches, like the Linnstrument for example, others are more specified. Then, it's also still important how a specific controller feels to a performer. A ROLI for example might just not be for everyone.
The biggest problem I see though, is that of adaption: Not everybody is willing to un- or re-learn a playing technique just for the sake of a different controller. Many people still feel comfortable with a keyboard, no matter how limited it might be at the touch of one button. If someone also plays an instrument with a fretboard, the transition towards a Linnstrument might not be that hard at all. That's basically why I think that alternative controllers won't become a mass market phenomenon, at least not in the near future.
At this point I'm just not sure I need anything else! Between what's available as synth software in the box (Macbook Pro), a new external hardware synth will have to provide a sound I just can't get from my P12. So far - I haven't hit that wall. :)
Well, generally speaking I think that the next DSI instrument would have to be substantially different enough from the Prophet-6, OB-6, Prophet 12 and Pro 2, yes.
-
(https://scontent.ftxl1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/16105483_10207913540748591_2398722645868738166_n.jpg?oh=6934974aab0068470a13d4a76a1b02bd&oe=5908955E)
-
Interesting that there are no knobs or parameters in the picture. Just the keyboard, and played with two hands by somebody who appears to be married.
If we, as a community, alternately obsess over specifications and playability, the focus here is the playability.
-
(https://scontent.ftxl1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/16105483_10207913540748591_2398722645868738166_n.jpg?oh=6934974aab0068470a13d4a76a1b02bd&oe=5908955E)
Hmm–does not look like a CME keybed–ergo, not likely inexpensive–nor does it look like Fatar keys (though the image is quite blurry)....
-
Hmm–does not look like a CME keybed–ergo, not likely inexpensive–nor does it look like Fatar keys (though the image is quite blurry)....
Maybe its their first mini-keys instrument? Who knows!?
-
Maybe it comes with a marriage certificate.
-
With free partner upgrades.
-
Hmph, the first synthesizer designed specifically for married men. I would have expected it to be monophonic. :D
-
Oh it can be polyphonic but at most two of the voices sound fully evolved.
Perhaps that could finally be the case for fully multi-timbral DSI instruments?
-
Regardless, I naturally like the emphasis. This one is clearly a musical instrument for keyboardists.
Now when will DSI produce a pedalboard synthesizer? Oh, come on now, I'm trying to start a revolution in the synthesizer world. Free up your left hands! A pedalboard in every rig!
-
Hmph, the first synthesizer designed specifically for married men. I would have expected it to be monophonic.
I would say it would have a top cover that made it look like a beat up SQ-2 you could buy in a pawn shop for $75?
-
Oh it can be polyphonic but at most two of the voices sound fully evolved.
Perhaps that could finally be the case for fully multi-timbral DSI instruments?
The ongoing struggle between marriage and multi-timbrality?
-
What does the C#m7 chord tell us?
-
Funny, I thought that was the first inversion of an A Major. Unless the left pincky is on an F#
-
By the way, Paul, where did you find that photograph? I didn't see it on DSI's social media sites.
-
Funny, I thought that was the first inversion of an A Major. Unless the left pincky is on an F#
Hm, I think neither the lower F# and the A keys are pressed down here, but the first inversion of A Major might have been played before or after, which might possibly lead to further conclusions… :o ::)
I assume, we're going to see the video this was taken from tomorrow.
-
By the way, Paul, where did you find that photograph? I didn't see it on DSI's social media sites.
Oh sh*t, I forgot about the NDA!! - No, seriously, it appeared on my Facebook timeline this morning and it was posted by Mark Wilcox.
-
DSI's Instagram has a photograph of two lads sitting with four tall drinks and four shot glasses. Hmmm, a bi-timbral eight-voice? ;D
-
DSI's Instagram has a photograph of two lads sitting with four tall drinks and four shot glasses. Hmmm, a bi-timbral eight-voice? ;D
No, just having a jolly good time.
-
DSI's Instagram has a photograph of two lads sitting with four tall drinks and four shot glasses. Hmmm, a bi-timbral eight-voice? ;D
… or can you identify the new synth from the shot glasses?
-
DSI's Instagram has a photograph of two lads sitting with four tall drinks and four shot glasses. Hmmm, a bi-timbral eight-voice? ;D
… or can you identify the new synth from the shot glasses?
Oh yes. Wait...I think I see a reflection. Oh, it's only an exit sign.
-
Now when will DSI produce a pedalboard synthesizer? Oh, come on now, I'm trying to start a revolution in the synthesizer world. Free up your left hands! A pedalboard in every rig!
Would you really like to sit on the floor while adjusting parameters on a pedal board synthesizer? Seriously?
My suggestion is instead to use a module and then hope for someone like Keith McMillen to make a (possibly modular) pedal board controller that features full sized pedals and is light weight too. The question however is how many more dimensions of control a pedal board controller would benefit from. Could you see yourself use 3D control in form of pressure, position and tilt for each key independently on a pedal board synthesizer?
Which nicely rounds up to being a question of the MIDI expressiveness features in DSI modules.
-
DSI's Instagram has a photograph of two lads sitting with four tall drinks and four shot glasses. Hmmm, a bi-timbral eight-voice? ;D
Looks more like a synthesizer with four analog and four digital voices! ;)
Mentioned photo: https://www.instagram.com/p/BPY4BbYj5hv/
PS: Is that Chris to the left?
-
DSI's Instagram has a photograph of two lads sitting with four tall drinks and four shot glasses. Hmmm, a bi-timbral eight-voice? ;D
Looks more like a synthesizer with four analog and four digital voices! ;)
Mentioned photo: https://www.instagram.com/p/BPY4BbYj5hv/
PS: Is that Chris to the left?
What's analog, what's digital? The distillery or the brewery?
-
Now when will DSI produce a pedalboard synthesizer? Oh, come on now, I'm trying to start a revolution in the synthesizer world. Free up your left hands! A pedalboard in every rig!
Would you really like to sit on the floor while adjusting parameters on a pedal board synthesizer? Seriously?
My suggestion is instead to use a module and then hope for someone like Keith McMillen to make a (possibly modular) pedal board controller that features full sized pedals and is light weight too. The question however is how many more dimensions of control a pedal board controller would benefit from. Could you see yourself use 3D control in form of pressure, position and tilt for each key independently on a pedal board synthesizer?
Which nicely rounds up to being a question of the MIDI expressiveness features in DSI modules.
I realize this statement may be outrageous on a synthesizer forum, but the pedalboard doesn't need to be re-invented. It only needs to be available in different sizes. Velocity, aftertouch, and so on? Whatever. A pedalboard can do so much as a simple on/off trigger. In addition, it doesn't have to be used exclusively for bass. The organ literature often uses it to play melodies. I suppose a synthesist could also use it for effects and percussion. Its strength and uniqueness, though, is in its ability to provide a strong bass and to free up one's left hand for playing additional parts.
As for your first question - who's sitting on the floor? I'm sitting on an organ bench with the sound source for my pedalboard - an Evolver Desktop - placed on a music stand at my eye level. It has to be at that level, because I'm often changing it while performing. These issues are worked out quite easily.
An additional feature could be to provide some form of foot triggers for changing programs. Pipe organs have toe pistons. One press of a piston with your foot and the registration for the entire organ is instantly changed. Imagine the power if this were adapted for the synthesizer. Hammond has done this somewhat, but poorly in my opinion.
The synthesizer pedalboard is the greatest invention still waiting to be added to the synthesist's set up. Believe me, it would transform the medium in a short period of time. And then synthesists would ask, "How did we ever manage without it?"
-
The ongoing struggle between marriage and multi-timbrality?
Exactly! Wonder how the corresponding octaver related product would be? Perhaps a new family of behavior shifting algorithms?
-
I just saw an advertisement on a Japanese page for a new module posted on the Gear Slutz forum. I'm not sure if there's any legitimacy for it.
-
Well, it's just a Stereoping Synth Controller on top of a Prophet VS, not really related to any NAMM news.
http://www.stereoping.com/synth-controller-pagesections/?lang=en
-
Yeah I was confused by it as well. I didn't think DSI would bring something like that out without bringing out a keyboard version first.
-
Too bad. I'd be thrilled to see a DSI multi-effects unit in that sort of configuration.
-
Too bad. I'd be thrilled to see a DSI multi-effects unit in that sort of configuration.
Well, we all know by now that something bigger is going to be announced. So if anything like an effect box would be released, it would have to happen later this year. Plus: We also know that the goal of developing cheaper products is basically a thing of the past now.
-
I realize this statement may be outrageous on a synthesizer forum, but the pedalboard doesn't need to be re-invented. It only needs to be available in different sizes. Velocity, aftertouch, and so on? Whatever. A pedalboard can do so much as a simple on/off trigger. In addition, it doesn't have to be used exclusively for bass. The organ literature often uses it to play melodies. The synthesist could also use it for effects and percussion.
As for your first question - who's sitting on the floor? I'm sitting on an organ bench with the sound source for my pedalboard - an Evolver Desktop - placed on a music stand at my eye level. It has to be at that level, because I'm often changing it while performing. These things are worked out quite easily.
The synthesizer pedalboard is the greatest invention still waiting to be added to the synthesist's set up. Believe me, it would transform the medium in a short period of time. And then synthesists would ask, "How did we ever manage without it?"
No questioning of the need for pedal boards for synthesizer players wanting it.
To me it looks like what is needed are more affordable lighter weight pedal board controllers. I think it would be very cool if a company like KMI did a new take on pedal boards. They are already developing a folding version of their new full sized keyboard controller and that would be perfect for pedal boards. Or perhaps a company making carbon fiber products could team up with an existing manufacturer of pedal boards to make a lighter weight solution.
And thanks for showing your setup. To me it looks like the perfect solution is to consider the pedal board an alternate controller being connected to a synthesizer module just like you do it now. In other words: a pedal board synthesizer would be too much integration compared to the multi-use advantage of ordinary modules. Not at least because of the cost and complexity of finding the right pedal board to integrate into it.
-
Too bad. I'd be thrilled to see a DSI multi-effects unit in that sort of configuration.
Well, we all know by now that something bigger is going to be announced. So if anything like an effect box would be released, it would have to happen later this year. Plus: We also know that the goal of developing cheaper products is basically a thing of the past now.
Yes, but maybe DSI will announce at NAMM the smaller product to be released later this year.
-
And thanks for showing your setup. To me it looks like the perfect solution is to consider the pedal board an alternate controller being connected to a synthesizer module just like you do it now. In other words: a pedal board synthesizer would be too much integration compared to the multi-use advantage of ordinary modules. Not at least because of the cost and complexity of finding the right pedal board to integrate into it.
Again, I don't think inventiveness is needed here. It's a simple matter; take a pedalboard of whatever size and use it to control your favorite synthesizer module. Both exist. There are several one-octave pedalboards already available from various companies, and larger sizes as well. Modules are everywhere. It's only a matter of planting the idea and synthesists realizing what a golden opportunity it is. Fuseball has taken up the challenge. I hope others try it as well.
I mean, I'm only hoping to collect royalties for the idea, that's all. ;D
-
The image posted by Paul Dither earlier today is now officially on their social media:
https://twitter.com/dsiSequential/status/821779664612032520
(together with a little uncontrollable fanboyism)
-
In other words: a pedal board synthesizer would be too much integration compared to the multi-use advantage of ordinary modules. Not at least because of the cost and complexity of finding the right pedal board to integrate into it.
With all due respect I might add that the need for pedal keys is also extremely small if you take it outside the organ world, as there are not that many synthesizer players who perform within an organ setup. Of all rather classic synth performers only Wendy Carlos' studio setup comes to my mind. So I think with the most prominent offers by Nord and Hammond, this highly specialized market is already well-covered - also for synth users. And MIDI pedal keys also offer far more flexibility than pedal keys with an integrated synth engine would, since they allow you to control whatever you like with them.
-
Again, I don't think inventiveness is needed here. It's a simple matter; take a pedalboard of whatever size and use it to control your favorite synthesizer module. Both exist. There are several one-octave pedalboards already available from various companies, and larger sizes as well.
And yet the best ones are way too expensive and way too heavy according to your earlier posts. So there are a need for new pedal board controllers. But of cause that is a minor point.
Fingers crossed for your royalties plot! ;)
With all due respect I might add that the need for pedal keys is also extremely small if you take it outside the organ world, as there are not that many synthesizer players who perform within an organ setup.
Yeah its a speciality product. And yet there are room for expanding the market once synthesizer players realize there are a potential in their use. I have placed pedal boards in the alternate controller world even though its a very old innovation.
-
In other words: a pedal board synthesizer would be too much integration compared to the multi-use advantage of ordinary modules. Not at least because of the cost and complexity of finding the right pedal board to integrate into it.
With all due respect I might add that the need for pedal keys is also extremely small if you take it outside the organ world, as there are not that many synthesizer players who perform within an organ setup. Of all rather classic synth performers only Wendy Carlos' studio setup comes to my mind. So I think with the most prominent offers by Nord and Hammond, this highly specialized market is already well-covered - also for synth users. And MIDI pedal keys also offer far more flexibility than pedal keys with an integrated synth engine would, since they allow you to control whatever you like with them.
My point is, that's the problem - it's still specialized. There's no need for this, as if it's only for trained organists to use pedalboards. Consider typical electronica/ambient: it most often uses long lumbering sustained bass notes. It would take minimal skill to play these on a one-octave pedalboard, not much more than it takes to adapt to mini keys.
There's no reason for this idea not to take off, except that it's new and hasn't been seriously considered. Synthesists are very much into new things and experimentation. Well, here's something new and worth trying. You guys are fascinated by new devices for triggering synthesizers. Well, here's another device.
-
Still no idea why Moog discontinued the Tarus Pedals. They should bring them back out again.
-
Still no idea why Moog discontinued the Tarus Pedals. They should bring them back out again.
If I remember correctly, they were a commercial disaster. So they just released its engine separately: the Minitaur.
-
And yet the best ones are way too expensive and way too heavy according to your earlier posts. So there are a need for new pedal board controllers. But of cause that is a minor point.
And as we all know, synthesists just hate buying lots of expensive equipment....
-
Still no idea why Moog discontinued the Tarus Pedals. They should bring them back out again.
If I remember correctly, they were a commercial disaster. So they just released its engine separately: the Minitaur.
The problem with the Moog Taurus pedals (and I owned the original set years ago) was that they were seemingly designed for free-standing guitarists who could easily bend over and program them. A keyboardist performs in a totally different physical arrangement. The controls need to be a separate module from the pedals, and the synthesist needs to be seated at a bench over the instrument so that both feet are free to play pedal lines. If the pedals are played while standing, then only one foot can play them at a time, which restricts the playing immensely and limits the performer primarily to long slow notes. Nor can they play more than one note at a time. When I was spending more time composing organ music, I found it tremendously powerful to end a piece by adding in the pedals the fifth to the root. I can't presently do that on my monophonic pedal configuration, but I intend to in the future.
-
I honestly wonder if we'll ever see something like the Alesis Andromeda again. It's always been one I've been interested in but I think it was a bit ahead of it's time and came out way before the analog resurgence. I think if a company developed something similar now it would be more than well received. It's insanely powerful.
-
Still no idea why Moog discontinued the Tarus Pedals. They should bring them back out again.
If I remember correctly, they were a commercial disaster. So they just released its engine separately: the Minitaur.
The problem with the Moog Taurus pedals (and I owned the original set years ago) was that they were seemingly designed for free-standing guitarists who could easily bend over and program them. A keyboardist performs in a totally different physical arrangement. The controls need to be a separate module from the pedals, and the synthesist needs to be seated at a bench over the instrument so that both feet are free to play pedal lines. If the pedals are played while standing, then only one foot can play them at a time, which restricts the playing immensely and limits the performer primarily to long slow notes. Nor can they play more than one note at a time. When I was spending more time composing organ music, I found it tremendously powerful to end a piece by adding in the pedals the fifth to the root. I can't presently do that on my monophonic pedal configuration.
OR if you don't care anymore, you could just smash them with your fists dramatically like Mo Foster.
-
When I was spending more time composing organ music, I found it tremendously powerful to end a piece by adding in the pedals the fifth to the root. I can't presently do that on my monophonic pedal configuration, but I intend to in the future.
Sounds like a larger mixer and finding a used Evolver Desktop.
-
You're right in both cases.
-
I honestly wonder if we'll ever see something like the Alesis Andromeda again. It's always been one I've been interested in but I think it was a bit ahead of it's time and came out way before the analog resurgence. I think if a company developed something similar now it would be more than well received. It's insanely powerful.
I was a great admirer of the Andromeda and came close to buying one. In the end, I chose not to, due to the instrument's bugs and the famously poor support offered by Alesis. But I still have a dream of finding a similar instrument.
-
I was a great admirer of the Andromeda and came close to buying one. In the end, I chose not to, due to the instrument's bugs and the famously poor support offered by Alesis. But I still have a dream of finding a similar instrument.
+ 1
-
(https://scontent.ftxl1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/16105483_10207913540748591_2398722645868738166_n.jpg?oh=6934974aab0068470a13d4a76a1b02bd&oe=5908955E)
That instrument most closely resembles a Prophet-6. The more Prophets the merrier!
-
That instrument most closely resembles a Prophet-6. The more Prophets the merrier!
How can you tell?
-
I'm not saying it is a Prophet-6, but only that it resembles it. Only the P-6 has that amount of blank black control panel just above the keyboard. All the other instruments have controls or panel designs just above the keyboard.
So far, I absolutely love the new synthesizer. :D
-
Yeah, that's true. Although the space at the bottom of the front panel seems to be a bit wider on this one. But then, we don't know what's underneath the NAMM banner. It's also hard to tell whether the color is actually black or anthracite (like on the most recent offerings with the exception of the OB-6).
-
Yeah, that's true. Although the space at the bottom of the front panel seems to be a bit wider on this one. But then, we don't know what's underneath the NAMM banner. It's also hard to tell whether the color is actually black or anthracite (like on the most recent offerings with the exception of the OB-6).
... or if it was "Photo-shopped" black to hide whatever it is....
-
Yeah, that's true. Although the space at the bottom of the front panel seems to be a bit wider on this one. But then, we don't know what's underneath the NAMM banner. It's also hard to tell whether the color is actually black or anthracite (like on the most recent offerings with the exception of the OB-6).
... or if it was "Photo-shopped" black to hide whatever it is....
Yep, that's the other option.
-
I doubt it. It looks pretty natural as it is.
-
I doubt it. It looks pretty natural as it is.
Yeah, looks legit if you lighten it up.
-
I doubt it. It looks pretty natural as it is.
Yeah, looks legit if you lighten it up.
Yeah, it'd be impossible to photoshop it.
-
It's not a matter of impossibility. I just don't think the guys at DSI would go to so much trouble over a single photograph.
-
I doubt it. It looks pretty natural as it is.
Yeah, looks legit if you lighten it up.
Yeah, it'd be impossible to photoshop it.
Well, you can see the different shades of light even at the low resolution. So that makes a difference to the auto-fill function.
-
So it has at least
- 4-voice polyphony,
- a 3 octave keyboard,
- and a good amount of blank space just above the keyboard.
Oh, and married people seem to like it.
-
So it has at least
- 4-voice polyphony,
- a 3 octave keyboard,
- and a good amount of blank space just above the keyboard.
Oh, and married people seem to like it.
They'll sell millions of 'em!
-
It's already a classic. I'll take four. No, wait - make that six. And when will the module be available? Uh, yeah - two, please.
-
This is really the end. I mean everyone's search for the perfect synthesizer will be over by tomorrow.
-
It's already a classic. I'll take four. When will the module be available?
Images of the module have already been leaked on other social media sites....
-
It's already a classic. I'll take four. When will the module be available?
Images of the module have already been leaked on other social media sites....
Gasp! I love it! It's so...consistent.
-
... and in less than 24h this thread will be all but forgotten....
-
... and in less than 24h this thread will be all but forgotten....
Nah, it says "Next New DSI Instrument," so it will go on for a while.
-
As soon as we have a name, the new thread begins.
-
But then, we don't know what's underneath the NAMM banner.
I was thinking the same; a photo like this could be done with the X4, for example. Maybe it's a Mopho X8!
-
I'm frothing at the mouth. Please let it have splits and layers.
-
Wonder if a dealer makes the same stunt as last year where the OB-6 was announced a few hours too early because of messed up website configuration and/or sales department sloppiness?
-
But then, we don't know what's underneath the NAMM banner.
I was thinking the same; a photo like this could be done with the X4, for example. Maybe it's a Mopho X8!
Wouldn't that be a Prophet '08?
No, please tell me the name "Mopho" is gone forever.
-
No, please tell me the name "Mopho" is gone forever.
Psychoanalysis was invented for that issue.
-
But then, we don't know what's underneath the NAMM banner.
I was thinking the same; a photo like this could be done with the X4, for example. Maybe it's a Mopho X8!
Wouldn't that be a Prophet '08?
Strictly speaking: no. A Mopho x4 has 2 sub-oscillators and a feedback section, which is something the Prophet '08 is lacking as well as a USB connection.
-
I know, I know. In a general way, a Mopho x8 would be a Prophet '08.
I'm still smarting that DSI never made a Tetr4 Keyboard.
-
Next up will be the Polyphonic Prophet affectionally known as "Popho".
-
Wouldn't that be "Popro"?
-
In theory yes but with the intended semantics in mind the "h" is much easier to pronounce around than the "r" is.
-
It's actually a non-programmable monophonic instrument with a mono signal, one digital oscillator, no noise, no glide, no sequencer or arpeggiator, a non-resonant 4-pole lowpass filter, a single two-stage envelope, no LFO's, no velocity or after touch, and two octaves of reverse-colored mini keys. It's called the Prophet BS.
-
I just wanna synth that's called "Dr. Freud."
-
I just wanna synth that's called "Dr. Freud."
If using a keyboard is okay with you simply type "ESC x doctor" followed by return in Emacs and help will be there immediately. Its said to be a she though.
-
I just wanna synth that's called "Dr. Freud."
If using a keyboard is okay with you simply type "ESC x doctor" followed by return in Emacs and help will be there immediately. Its said to be a she though.
But I don't wanna escape with a random doctor.
-
Here's one more:
(https://scontent.ftxl1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/15977975_10207918881722112_8143067055650311587_n.jpg?oh=3486f483d72185a1341aced4db74c990&oe=5922FD99)
Note says: "Setting up the booth. Tomorrow at 10 AM we go live."
-
That's probably 10:00 PST, which is 13:00 for me. I'll be in a "discovery meeting" learning about software scope. I'm sure I'll be forgiven for tuning out for a little while, though. Tuning out is what agile development is all about.
-
Interesting that in the banner is the Pro 2 / 12 Livery...... Maybe a real poly Pro 2? a replacement mono is also overdue....
Why can't it be tomorrow today!
-
Sonicstate teaser: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9i7q-I6aW-s
If you're impatient, jump to 4:00.
-
Hmph, the first synthesizer designed specifically for married men. I would have expected it to be monophonic. :D
Or you can only play with it once a Week/Month/Year depending on how long you have had it.
-
That's probably 10:00 PST, which is 13:00 for me. I'll be in a "discovery meeting" learning about software scope. I'm sure I'll be forgiven for tuning out for a little while, though. Tuning out is what agile development is all about.
Ha! I'm also a software architect, and will be in meetings most of NAMM. Gotta sneak off on the phone under the table to see what's going on.
-
Seeing that pic, with the possibly different keybed, demo of poly, and blank console...I'm hoping it's not some form of an EP (throwback, unique, clav, etc). That would be a snore fest ???
Crossing fingers for something forward-moving/unique or dual-voiced/filtered analog heaven.
-
I'll be in a "discovery meeting" learning about software scope. I'm sure I'll be forgiven for tuning out for a little while, though. Tuning out is what agile development is all about.
lol - back home myself after a few weeks' worth of meetings, hoping to code without administrative distraction!
-
https://youtu.be/JUDZoDJHzdA
Prophet 6 one voice synth :)
-
(http://i59.tinypic.com/35jyqsn.jpg)
-
With the REV2 now announced to quite a bit of excitement, I'm expecting the used market to be flooded with Prophet '08's at low prices, but I haven't seen it yet. Ebay and Reverb prices for the keyboard version are still at $1,300 and up, and even Poly Evolver Keyboards are still above $2,000. But there are quite a few now available. Perhaps when the REV2 is finally shipping, prices for the other two instruments will nose dive. It will be a difficult time to sell.
Incidentally, the substantially expanded REV2 and the Poly Evolver Keyboard would make a fabulous combination. I've always felt the PEK somewhat dwarfed the P'08, but the "updated" P'08 has somewhat caught up to it in both physical size and substance. The REV2 control board is a bit deeper, front to back, than the old P'08.
-
With the REV2 now announced to quite a bit of excitement, I'm expecting the used market to be flooded with Prophet '08's at low prices, but I haven't seen it yet. Ebay and Reverb prices for the keyboard version are still at $1,300 and up, and even Poly Evolver Keyboards are still above $2,000. But there are quite a few now available. Perhaps when the REV2 is finally shipping, prices for the other two instruments will nose dive. It will be a difficult time to sell.
I'm not sure whether the used market will be flooded with Prophet '08s automatically. But I guess it's safe to assume that those who plan on selling their Prophet '08s might have to sell them at prices that are below the reduced prices for which they could be had by the end of last year. Based on that I'd say that the best time for selling Prophet '08s was probably before last year's price drop (which was the second I think, as it sold for $2,099.00 originally).
It's also not that the Prophet '08 has gone completely with the REV2, since the latter still is a Prophet '08 at its core. So as long as the REV2 is in production, the typical vintage synth logic won't really work, except for those people who prefer the appearance of the Prophet '08. That's the major difference with regard to the Evolver, which is a true vintage piece by now that was also sold in fewer quantities, which also makes it rarer and hence leads to higher prices on the used market.
-
Hey, new here. Yet another refugee from GS. ;) This isn't a bad way to start off.
With the P REV2 about to appear, what would the class here be looking forward to in 2018? Some new flagship? This is what I'm hoping for, as the REV2 dukes it out with the likes of the PEAK and that dreaded DM12 in the mid price bracket. So assuming it's a flagship, what do you guys expect or want?
Personally, I'd rather not see another hybrid, as the Pro2 and P~12 handle that aspect more than capably. Not a new take on the VS or PolyEvolver either. I'd much rather see a super Prophet like a T-8 on steroids, with hopefully a polypressure keyboard. Or a monster Obie like a Matrix-12 style synth. Or dare I say it, helping Moog out the way Dave did with Tom and making a poly-Moog, with Moog branding.
-
Welcome to the DSI Forum, Synthguy. Since you've come from GS, you may need to enlist in our series of intensive deprogramming sessions in which, after having several differences of opinions with other posters, you'll be physically restrained and made to respond to them without profanity, abuse, or face-in-palm emoticons. If you survive, then you'll be declared clean and fit to post.
Welcome, welcome. ;D
Regarding your question, I'm always hoping for the same from DSI - first, a large VCO poly synth. I realize the Prophet Rev2 may be as large as DSI goes, but I'd love to see a really big all-analog instrument - say, a cross between the Prophet 12 and the Prophet-6. Second, I hope to see a VCO mono synth - in this case, a cross between the Pro 2 and the Prophet-6. I'd even be happy with a 3 1/2- 4 octave keyboard version of the Toraiz AS-1 if it had the typical DSI control panel.
As for actual expectations, I had thought DSI would produce an all-digital synthesizer, but that apparently isn't going to happen. And with the PEAK in the air, I would expect a true successor to the Poly Evolver to be even less likely than before. I'm all out of expectations.
-
Welcome to the DSI Forum, Synthguy. Since you've come from GS, you may need to enlist in our series of intensive deprogramming sessions in which, after having several differences of opinions with other posters, you'll be physically restrained and made to respond to them without profanity, abuse, or face-in-palm emoticons. If you survive, then you'll be declared clean and fit to post.
Welcome, welcome. ;D
lol
-
I'm at a complete loss as to what to expect next. I'm still pushing for one of the following
Prophet 20 with multitimbrality (although this could be tricky with finding a balance between menu diving and a direct hands on experience)
Prophet X (A complete digital synth with boy VS and FM capabilities as well as sampling).....but this could easily happen with an OS upgrade for the Prophet 12 that adds more VS waves and samples from the Prophet 2000 as oscillator shape options.
Much like how the Rev2 is essentially two Prophet 08s under one hood (with a better) layout could we see the same thing happen with the Prophet 6 as sort of a throwback to the Prophet 10? With the OPTION to hook a controller up to the synth and play each engine on separate keybeds as well as the ability to split and layer on a single keybed. With no menu in keeping true to the Prophet 6 tradition and layout.
Would we see an the idea Pioneer AS-1 as an actual successor of the Pro 2 with 4 independent VCO based AS-1 engines under one hood with a fatar keybed allowing 4 different patches and sequences to be played independently? The PRO-4?
More importantly to me....will we ever see the Sequential name on anything again?
-
As for actual expectations, I had thought DSI would produce an all-digital synthesizer, but that apparently isn't going to happen. And with the PEAK in the air, I would expect a true successor to the Poly Evolver to be even less likely than before. I'm all out of expectations.
Not sure about that one... If DSI had a new digital synth in the works, R&D would have started long before DSI ever heard of the Peak. I doubt news of a competitor synth would have them abandon the R&D that was already in progress. Right?
-
As for actual expectations, I had thought DSI would produce an all-digital synthesizer, but that apparently isn't going to happen. And with the PEAK in the air, I would expect a true successor to the Poly Evolver to be even less likely than before. I'm all out of expectations.
Not sure about that one... If DSI had a new digital synth in the works, R&D would have started long before DSI ever heard of the Peak. I doubt news of a competitor synth would have them abandon the R&D that was already in progress. Right?
I don't know. DSI seems to operate at least somewhat independently of the market. I'm just saying that, if they were considering a revived Evolver, the PEAK would make this an inopportune time to release it. I'm sure many of their instrument ideas end up on the cutting room floor. But more importantly, Robot Heart has plainly stated that it's fairly certain Dave will not make a Poly Evolver Keyboard Mk II, so that's the end of that hope. Personally, I would have been thrilled if they did with the PEK what they've done with the Prophet '08 in the Rev2. It would have been so gratifying to see the old flagship given a new coat of blue paint.
-
As for actual expectations, I had thought DSI would produce an all-digital synthesizer, but that apparently isn't going to happen. And with the PEAK in the air, I would expect a true successor to the Poly Evolver to be even less likely than before. I'm all out of expectations.
Not sure about that one... If DSI had a new digital synth in the works, R&D would have started long before DSI ever heard of the Peak. I doubt news of a competitor synth would have them abandon the R&D that was already in progress. Right?
I don't know. DSI seems to operate at least somewhat independently of the market. I'm just saying that, if they were considering a revived Evolver, the PEAK would make this an inopportune time to release it. I'm sure many of their instrument ideas end up on the cutting room floor. But more importantly, Robot Heart has plainly stated that it's fairly certain Dave will not make a Poly Evolver Keyboard Mk II, so that's the end of that hope. Personally, I would have been thrilled if they did with the PEK what they've done with the Prophet '08 in the Rev2. It would have been so gratifying to see the old flagship given a new coat of blue paint.
Dave also once stated he would never make a new VCO based synth which he ended up doing.
-
That's right; he even laughed at the idea several times. But that's a slim reason for hope, since a VCO synth is a general idea, whereas the Poly Evolver is a specific instrument. I think DSI would respond: The Prophet 12 is the Evolver Mk II, so the PEK will not be revisited.
-
More importantly to me....will we ever see the Sequential name on anything again?
That is an intriguing question. Could the name be reserved for one and only one instrument? It seems absurd. I suppose the Toraiz AS-1 could be partially regarded as a Sequential instrument. But what about an all-new instrument? And must Sequential remain a backward-looking line of synthesizers and DSI the forward-looking one?
If we're ever to see a VCO mono synth from Dave Smith, I would say it will be through the Sequential concept. Perhaps a Prophet 1?
-
More importantly to me....will we ever see the Sequential name on anything again?
That is an intriguing question. Could the name be reserved for one and only one instrument? It seems absurd. I suppose the Toraiz AS-1 could be partially regarded as a Sequential instrument. But what about an all-new instrument? And must Sequential remain a backward-looking line of synthesizers and DSI the forward-looking one?
I think ever since the Prophet-6 there was simply no reason to use the Sequential name. I guess it could have been used for the OB-6 for technical reasons, since the OB-6 was based on the topology of the Prophet-6. With regard to content, though, using the name DSI in conjunction with "Tom Oberheim" first emphasized the latest names of the designers' companies (after all, DSI is newer than Sequential) and second it also drew more attention to the two individuals Dave and Tom.
As the REV2 is an upgraded Prophet '08, the name DSI was mandatory. That pretty much only leaves the AS-1, for which the Sequential banner could have been rightly used due to it being related to the Prophet-6. But I assume, since DSI is still the main or general name of the company, they choose it for collaborations. It would also be confusing if one Toraiz product carried the name DSI and the other the name Sequential.
If we're ever to see a VCO mono synth from Dave Smith, I would say it will be through the Sequential concept. Perhaps a Prophet 1?
Well, we just saw a new monosynth like that and it's called the AS-1. And the official answer to a reissued Pro-One was the Pro 2, which is much more powerful and runs circles around a Pro-One both in terms of features and sonic flexibility. So the two extremes of a monosynth - one based on the Prophet-6 voice, one forward looking powerhouse - have already been released.
It would make little to no sense to design a third monosynth whose novelty only lies in combining the engine of the AS-1 with a housing that's similar to that of the Pro 2 in terms of size, especially since the market is already pretty saturated with VCO-based monosynths. Plus: the Prophet-6 can also already be used as that kind of monosynth with a generous keyboard. Releasing just another monosynth version that wouldn't offer anything substantially new inside would also most likely cause the then not unjustified reaction, "they're running out of ideas."
As for next designs: This is getting harder to predict, especially since the whole market situation changed significantly over the past couple of years and even months. With an increasing number of low-, mid-, and high-price competitors around who also release or start to release analog or hybrid polysynths, innovative functionality and features become more and more important in order to come up with a product that's different and unique enough. That can happen on a rather subtle level like the inclusion of new technology (an example would be the use of FPGAs in the PEAK), or on a conceptual level that provides a different take on the topology of a synth voice. While I'm not saying that we need an Evolver REV2, an instrument in the spirit of the Evolver or something like a West-Coast-inspired polysynth that chysn once insinuated would certainly cater towards a different take on the conceptual side.
An eccentric or overly experimental design, however, is not always without any risks either, as especially the Prophet '08, the Prophet-6, and the OB-6 proved that people are definitely more into simpler engines. It was never really a question, for example, whether the Poly Evolver or the Prophet '08 was the bestseller.
-
Yes, the Prophet-6 can be used as a mono synth, but not everyone can afford a mono synth of that price. And the Toraiz-A1 is sort of a DSI product, and sort of not. Hence, it isn't carried on the DSI web site. But lacking a traditional keyboard, it just can't fulfill the complete mono synth role.
While the Prophet '08 was in production (and the Prophet '08 can be used as a mono synth), DSI offered the Tetr4, the Mopho desktop, the Mopho Keyboard, the Mopho x4, and the Mopho SE - all at the same time (even while the Evolver Desktop was still around). So, I do think there's a precedent for a Prophet-6 and a simultaneous one-voice keyboard version of the same, in spite of the Toraiz-A1 and Pro 2.
-
So, I do think there's a precedent for a Prophet-6 and a simultaneous one-voice keyboard version of the same, in spite of the Toraiz-A1.
Ah, I've been going on about this for years now. I can't remember exactly why I gave up on there being a Prophet 1, but there was definitely some post that made me realize that it isn't happening. Maybe it was something that somebody said about the Pro 2 being the DSI keyboard monosynth. Honestly, I don't remember, but I was pretty convinced at the time.
But that's okay. There's a good chance I'm going to replace my Little Phatty with Soundmachines Arches when it finally comes out.
-
Ah, I've been going on about this for years now. I can't remember exactly why I gave up on there being a Prophet 1, but there was definitely some post that made me realize that it isn't happening. Maybe it was something that somebody said about the Pro 2 being the DSI keyboard monosynth. Honestly, I don't remember, but I was pretty convinced at the time.
I don't know because I don't have one, but can a Pro 2 really serve in the place of a Pro One type VCA synthesizer? The former is an excellent instrument, but I don't see it as a front line analog substitute with a warm raw analog tone. Folks, correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't presently see the Pro 2 in this way. Otherwise, I would have bought one by now.
-
Yes, the Prophet-6 can be used as a mono synth, but not everyone can afford a mono synth of that price. And the Toraiz-A1 is sort of a DSI product, and sort of not. Hence, it isn't carried on the DSI web site. But lacking a traditional keyboard, it just can't fulfill the complete mono synth role.
The Prophet-6 might be an expensive choice for a monosynth, I just meant that it can technically used for this purpose in as much as a new Pro-One is already in there. And while the AS-1 is a collaborative effort, its synth voice is basically a monophonic Prophet-6.
While the Prophet '08 was in production (and the Prophet '08 can be used as a mono synth), DSI offered the Tetr4, the Mopho desktop, the Mopho Keyboard, the Mopho x4, and the Mopho SE - all at the same time (even while the Evolver monos were still around). So, I do think there's a precedent for a Prophet-6 and a simultaneous one-voice keyboard version of the same, in spite of the Toraiz-A1.
Those were also different times though. The Mopho and Tetra were introduced before the Volcas, the MS-20 and Odyssey reissues, the MiniBrute and MicroBrute, the MatrixBrute, the Minilogue, the Dominion-1, the Sub Phatty, the Sub 37, the Mother-32, and so on. Most of these instruments, particularly the monosynths by Arturia and Korg can be produced and sold at much lower prices which is one of the reasons DSI left behind the lower price market.
The other thing is, as I've already mentioned, that there are so many monosynths on the market right now that the world isn't necessarily waiting for yet another iteration, except it's even more affordable or it offers a unique feature set and hardware implementation. Concerning the latter, you might regard the MatrixBrute as the all-analog sibling of the Pro 2. So that spot has been filled as well.
What also changed is that in 2017 DSI are no longer competing with themselves when it comes to new analog or hybrid polysynths. Behringer now offers the DM12 and DM6, there's Novation's Peak which gained high interest, Waldorf's Quantum, and Modal's 002 and 008 in the higher price range. I would even add something like the Abyss by Dreadbox which is already pretty popular before it has even been released and - for those who don't care about whether it's truly analog or not - Roland's System-8. Those are all different choices for different priorities that didn't exist when the Prophet '08 was introduced for example.
-
Ah, I've been going on about this for years now. I can't remember exactly why I gave up on there being a Prophet 1, but there was definitely some post that made me realize that it isn't happening. Maybe it was something that somebody said about the Pro 2 being the DSI keyboard monosynth. Honestly, I don't remember, but I was pretty convinced at the time.
I don't know because I don't have one, but can a Pro 2 really serve in the place of a Pro One type VCA synthesizer? The former is an excellent instrument, but I don't see it as a front line analog substitute with a warm raw analog tone. Folks, correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't presently see the Pro 2 in this way. Otherwise, I would have bought one by now.
The Pro 2 can be many things. I personally never had the impression that the analog waveforms would scream "I'm a digital version of a VCO" at me. I find them pleasant sounding and particularly the sine wave has loads of bottom end. They are stable, but that's what the Slop parameter is for which can be used in a very subtle or wild manner just like the distortion can be used to spice up the sound to variying degrees, not to mention the trillion modulation options. All that and the sequencer as well as the paraphonic features make this a truly unique and utterly powerful monosynth that I regard as more of an Evolver successor than the Prophet 12.
-
It's probably worth an excursion to civilization (though I realize that you're probably not that far away) to try one.
I'm really quite happy with mine, though I understand that keybed span might be an issue.
-
There's a good chance I'm going to replace my Little Phatty with Soundmachines Arches when it finally comes out.
Interesting. I didn't pay attention to this one.
-
The Pro 2 can be many things. I personally never had the impression that the analog waveforms would scream "I'm a digital version of a VCO" at me. I find them pleasant sounding and particularly the sine wave has loads of bottom end. They are stable, but that's what the Slop parameter is for which can be used in a very subtle or wild manner just like the distortion can be used to spice up the sound to variying degrees, not to mention the trillion modulation options. All that and the sequencer as well as the paraphonic features make this a truly unique and utterly powerful monosynth that I regard as more of an Evolver successor than the Prophet 12.
One of my favorite Pro-2 tricks is to modulate the Slop amount with a slow, slewed random LFO... Dial it is as subtle or wild as you want. Gives life to the sound that screams analogue.
-
More importantly to me....will we ever see the Sequential name on anything again?
That is an intriguing question. Could the name be reserved for one and only one instrument? It seems absurd. I suppose the Toraiz AS-1 could be partially regarded as a Sequential instrument. But what about an all-new instrument? And must Sequential remain a backward-looking line of synthesizers and DSI the forward-looking one?
I think ever since the Prophet-6 there was simply no reason to use the Sequential name. I guess it could have been used for the OB-6 for technical reasons, since the OB-6 was based on the topology of the Prophet-6. With regard to content, though, using the name DSI in conjunction with "Tom Oberheim" first emphasized the latest names of the designers' companies (after all, DSI is newer than Sequential) and second it also drew more attention to the two individuals Dave and Tom.
As the REV2 is an upgraded Prophet '08, the name DSI was mandatory. That pretty much only leaves the AS-1, for which the Sequential banner could have been rightly used due to it being related to the Prophet-6. But I assume, since DSI is still the main or general name of the company, they choose it for collaborations. It would also be confusing if one Toraiz product carried the name DSI and the other the name Sequential.
If we're ever to see a VCO mono synth from Dave Smith, I would say it will be through the Sequential concept. Perhaps a Prophet 1?
Well, we just saw a new monosynth like that and it's called the AS-1. And the official answer to a reissued Pro-One was the Pro 2, which is much more powerful and runs circles around a Pro-One both in terms of features and sonic flexibility. So the two extremes of a monosynth - one based on the Prophet-6 voice, one forward looking powerhouse - have already been released.
It would make little to no sense to design a third monosynth whose novelty only lies in combining the engine of the AS-1 with a housing that's similar to that of the Pro 2 in terms of size, especially since the market is already pretty saturated with VCO-based monosynths. Plus: the Prophet-6 can also already be used as that kind of monosynth with a generous keyboard. Releasing just another monosynth version that wouldn't offer anything substantially new inside would also most likely cause the then not unjustified reaction, "they're running out of ideas."
As for next designs: This is getting harder to predict, especially since the whole market situation changed significantly over the past couple of years and even months. With an increasing number of low-, mid-, and high-price competitors around who also release or start to release analog or hybrid polysynths, innovative functionality and features become more and more important in order to come up with a product that's different and unique enough. That can happen on a rather subtle level like the inclusion of new technology (an example would be the use of FPGAs in the PEAK), or on a conceptual level that provides a different take on the topology of a synth voice. While I'm not saying that we need an Evolver REV2, an instrument in the spirit of the Evolver or something like a West-Coast-inspired polysynth that chysn once insinuated would certainly cater towards a different take on the conceptual side.
An eccentric or overly experimental design, however, is not always without any risks either, as especially the Prophet '08, the Prophet-6, and the OB-6 proved that people are definitely more into simpler engines. It was never really a question, for example, whether the Poly Evolver or the Prophet '08 was the bestseller.
I'd be horribly disappointed if I don't ever see the Sequential name again. Why not have DSI for affordably priced synths and Sequential reserved for VCO based or higher priced synths or perhaps throwback type synths.
What is puzzling to me is Dave has often said "If you want more of X simply use the module" yet essentially the Rev 2 is just two 08 modules together with a better layout. So are we to expect a Prophet 6 Rev 2? Hell, let's take it one step further....4 synth engines under one hood. Prophet x4. With four patches that can be zoned across the key bed or stacked. With a simple 4 rows of Prophet 6/OB6 patch/ bank selection. Keep it away from the menu diving.
-
One of my favorite Pro-2 tricks is to modulate the Slop amount with a slow, slewed random LFO... Dial it is as subtle or wild as you want. Gives life to the sound that screams analogue.
Exactly. And by that you also mentioned another incredible option: the LFO slew parameter which comes in handy when you try to find the right balance between the modulation amount and the overall modulation intensity or rather amplitude. As for achieving a pleasant analog tone: With the help of subtle distortion you can easily thicken the sound by adding more harmonics and not necessarily distorting it in the typical distortion effect manner. In that sense you can make it work a bit like a boost pedal. That also works incredibly well on rather digital and ethereal pad sounds. Add a bit of delay to that and you'll end up with quite huge sounding pads. In fact, I would say that I did most of my favorite pad sounds on the Pro 2, as it also provides the most delicious filter combo of any DSI synth in my view.
-
I'd be horribly disappointed if I don't ever see the Sequential name again. Why not have DSI for affordably priced synths and Sequential reserved for VCO based or higher priced synths or perhaps throwback type synths.
What is puzzling to me is Dave has often said "If you want more of X simply use the module" yet essentially the Rev 2 is just two 08 modules together with a better layout. So are we to expect a Prophet 6 Rev 2? Hell, let's take it one step further....4 synth engines under one hood. Prophet x4. With four patches that can be zoned across the key bed or stacked. With a simple 4 rows of Prophet 6/OB6 patch/ bank selection. Keep it away from the menu diving.
I see a niche market here for Sequential name plates. ;D
Seriously though, I could see the name reappear either on another reimagined classic (Prophet VS?) or on another VCO-based synth. But it's all hard to predict. As Dave once mentioned, he doesn't plan years ahead, so maybe he doesn't even know himself when or how to use the Sequential name next.
I'm pretty certain that we won't see a Prophet-6 REV2. First of all because the Prophet-6 is still relatively new and secondly because of pricing reasons. What a Prophet-6 with twice the voice count would cost can be easily estimated by adding the price of the keyboard and the module versions. It wouldn't get much cheaper, especially since you would have to create a new and bigger chassis, as 61 keys would be mandatory for that many voices.
-
It's all been done. I think the only way to go now is a 10-octave dual manual Prophet 6.
It shall be called the Prophet 12.
-
It's all been done. I think the only way to go now is a 10-octave dual manual Prophet 6.
It shall be called the Prophet 12.
(http://www.dodeka.info/musicalinstruments/files/dodeka_keyboard_full.jpg)
;D
-
Now I had one of those a few years ago, and I'm sure if the keyboard had looked like that, I would have noticed. ;D
-
I'd love to be able to play on that for a little while. Imagine little piano students everywhere learning that the most important interval is the minor third!
-
I still think something that can do more than one split and layer point is the way to go. A simple one patch on the lower half and another on the upper half just isn't that fresh anymore.
-
I still think something that can do more than one split and layer point is the way to go. A simple one patch on the lower half and another on the upper half just isn't that fresh anymore.
Perhaps something along these lines, from the Tetra:
Though the other combos and program banks can be used as a starting point for building new combos, the actual programs used are copies, so any edits made in Combo Mode do not affect the source programs. The converse is also true. Say a combo is created using the program “Arid” and then Arid is subsequently edited in Program Mode. Those changes will not be propagated to the combo. (The edited program can be reassigned to the combo, though.) In other words, Combos contain all parameters for all four voices when saved, and do not rely on referencing or mapping other programs, making organization and maintenance much easier.
-
I still think something that can do more than one split and layer point is the way to go. A simple one patch on the lower half and another on the upper half just isn't that fresh anymore.
I think the main reason for why multi-timbrality is not really a priority anymore amongst many musicians is the easy multi-tracking recording practice that goes hand in hand with using a DAW. From that perspective the only type of instrument where multi-timbrality would actually still make sense is the drum or rhythm machine that provides the option to assign a different MIDI-track to each percussive element of a given pattern. And instruments like the Tempest or the Analog Rytm do indeed allow for that. I think the Analog Four and the Vermona Perfourmer do too.
Nevertheless, there has been a sort of paradigm shift. I got my first synth in the 90s where it was considered to be standard to have 16 or at the very least 8 times multi-timbrality. It would have been hard for me to do any hardware MIDI sequencer based recordings without that feature. But the recording environments have changed.
What also needs to be considered is that many regard analog synths as specialized tools that are mostly used for particular sounds only analog synths can provide and not because of their MIDI capabilities. The amount of diversification that goes hand in hand with a more specialized assignment of instruments also runs counter to the idea of the classic workstation or instruments that should be capable of almost anything all by themselves. Today, the DAW took over that role for the most part. In many cases, it's the only center left in studios with lots of instruments that are supposed to take over particular tasks gathered around it.
Finally, CV gained a returning popularity over MIDI. There are even circles in which MIDI has become a dirty word, or in which people don't even know anything about the advantages anymore, or where they are simply not needed.
-
Plus the popularity of looping which turns one instrument into an ensemble, although a very repetitious one.
-
Since you've come from GS, you may need to enlist in our series of intensive deprogramming sessions in which, after having several differences of opinions with other posters, you'll be physically restrained and made to respond to them without profanity, abuse, or face-in-palm emoticons. If you survive, then you'll be declared clean and fit to post.
. o O ( Gear Skunks )
-
I still think something that can do more than one split and layer point is the way to go. A simple one patch on the lower half and another on the upper half just isn't that fresh anymore.
I think the main reason for why multi-timbrality is not really a priority anymore amongst many musicians is the easy multi-tracking recording practice that goes hand in hand with using a DAW. From that perspective the only type of instrument where multi-timbrality would actually still make sense is the drum or rhythm machine that provides the option to assign a different MIDI-track to each percussive element of a given pattern. And instruments like the Tempest or the Analog Rytm do indeed allow for that. I think the Analog Four and the Vermona Perfourmer do too.
Nevertheless, there has been a sort of paradigm shift. I got my first synth in the 90s where it was considered to be standard to have 16 or at the very least 8 times multi-timbrality. It would have been hard for me to do any hardware MIDI sequencer based recordings without that feature. But the recording environments have changed.
What also needs to be considered is that many regard analog synths as specialized tools that are mostly used for particular sounds only analog synths can provide and not because of their MIDI capabilities. The amount of diversification that goes hand in hand with a more specialized assignment of instruments also runs counter to the idea of the classic workstation or instruments that should be capable of almost anything all by themselves. Today, the DAW took over that role for the most part. In many cases, it's the only center left in studios with lots of instruments that are supposed to take over particular tasks gathered around it.
Finally, CV gained a returning popularity over MIDI. There are even circles in which MIDI has become a dirty word, or in which people don't even know anything about the advantages anymore, or where they are simply not needed.
I get that but honestly, I think it comes down to laziness. Everything is slowly becoming redundant now in terms of synths. I think Multi-timbrality would spice it up. It might not be "NEEDED" but frankly....guitar amps, actual analog synths, and hardware synths aren't "NEEDED" either. Nor are actual orchestral musicians for composers. Yet they still exist. The point I'm trying to make is, everyone's needs are different and it's good to have options. All I see now is DSI rehashing synths from the past, Moog stagnating, Korg releasing toys, and Waldorf essentially making a similar digital synth in varying bodies with slightly different features. Time to shake things up. There's about as much reason to release a multi timbral analog synth as there is to release a no preset/monophonic, 3 octave analog synth.
-
Everything is slowly becoming redundant now in terms of synths. I think Multi-timbrality would spice it up.
General synthesizer design advice: go for a walk in the Eurorack Wilderness (TM).
One extra vote for powerful multi-timbral features in new and existing products.
-
I get that but honestly, I think it comes down to laziness. Everything is slowly becoming redundant now in terms of synths. I think Multi-timbrality would spice it up. It might not be "NEEDED" but frankly....guitar amps, actual analog synths, and hardware synths aren't "NEEDED" either. Nor are actual orchestral musicians for composers. Yet they still exist. The point I'm trying to make is, everyone's needs are different and it's good to have options. All I see now is DSI rehashing synths from the past, Moog stagnating, Korg releasing toys, and Waldorf essentially making a similar digital synth in varying bodies with slightly different features. Time to shake things up. There's about as much reason to release a multi timbral analog synth as there is to release a no preset/monophonic, 3 octave analog synth.
I didn't mean to call into question any needs. I was just trying to consider a couple of current trends and developments that do also shape what is being produced and how. Beyond that: Fully agreed on the plurality of needs!
-
I think DSI would respond: The Prophet 12 is the Evolver Mk II
Do you think this is an accurate assessment?
-
can a Pro 2 really serve in the place of a Pro One type VCA synthesizer? The former is an excellent instrument, but I don't see it as a front line analog substitute with a warm raw analog tone. Folks, correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't presently see the Pro 2 in this way. Otherwise, I would have bought one by now.
Same here. All of my listening and research has convinced me that I'm just going to have to save up for good condition J-Wire Pro One. I really like the sound of the Mopho line, the AS-1, the Pro 2... I want them all!
But not one of them will give me the bass sounds I want from a Pro One. This is not something I can compromise on.
-
I think DSI would respond: The Prophet 12 is the Evolver Mk II
Do you think this is an accurate assessment?
I've never played or heard a Prophet 12 in person. That's my disclaimer. I've only heard it in YouTube and Soundcloud recordings, but I've listened to all of them over and over again. My opinion is that the sonic character of the Prophet 12 is nothing like that of the Poly Evolver. I won't repeat the details because I've posted them many times before, but I'm not at all convinced that a P12 could substitute for a PEK. If I though otherwise, I'd positively be a P12 owner.
-
Welcome to the DSI Forum, Synthguy. Since you've come from GS, you may need to enlist in our series of intensive deprogramming sessions in which, after having several differences of opinions with other posters, you'll be physically restrained and made to respond to them without profanity, abuse, or face-in-palm emoticons. If you survive, then you'll be declared clean and fit to post.
Woah... okay, when do I face towards Master Dave and how many times do I bow? :o ;D
Anyway, I'm a pretty good indicator of what many of the other synth heads want. If Novation had demoed another monosynth at Superbooth, I doubt many people would be fussed about it like they are for the PEAK. Or Waldorf, another mono or paraphonic module over the grand unveiling of Quantum at Musikmesse, which has many of us drooling - yes, at possibly more than $3000 US. And then there's the Relic-6 set to appear this summer at some $3500-ish. The monosynth market really is awash with synths already, not the least of which is the dreaded Pro2. Honestly, the mono I'm most interested in is the MatrixBrute, or the Softube Eurorack Modular.
I'm wanting to see Something Big from Dave and associates like I posted before. While the Prophet REV2 is an outstanding synth, I'm much more chuffed about the Prophet~6 and OB-6. If Dave is going to peel my eyes away from them, he should, as Sly says, "Be bold." 8)
I would also like to associate myself with the posts by Paul Dither. On the point of multitimbrality, I could see some advantage to that, perhaps, but mostly because "analog bias" is rather strong on this planet. I'm of the opinion that a solid VA or softie is plenty interchangeable in a mix with an analog. I might have something more to say on that in the hopefully near future. Still, the sex appeal of a multitimbral analog might just push it to the top of the lust list for the majority of synth buyers.
-
I do have to say I hate the patch selection on the Rev 2. Scrolling through patches with a knob just doesn't have the same immediacy as the Prophet 6 layout or even the Prophet 12 song list selection. It's going to be really annoying for real time recording not having that with the Rev 2
-
Because we needed to keep costs down, random program access wasn't possible on the Rev2. Fortunately, you can save programs wherever you want directly from the front panel. It does take a little bit of forethought, but in just a few minutes it's easy enough place programs sequentially so you only have to increment or decrement once to get to the next program you need. You can move programs freely without worrying about overwriting any factory sounds since we have both user and factory banks.
-
Voice-activated preset selection would be a groundbreaking feature for a future synth. That way, there's no need for buttons, and no need to remove one's hands from the keyboard to change the sound. Another benefit is that the audience would be able to interactively affect the performance by spontaneously calling out preset names.
-
Voice-activated preset selection would be a groundbreaking feature for a future synth. That way, there's no need for buttons, and no need to remove one's hands from the keyboard to change the sound. Another benefit is that the audience would be able to interactively affect the performance by spontaneously calling out preset names.
And after a few rounds of shots the synth blows up when everyone says a different patch name at the same time.
-
Because we needed to keep costs down, random program access wasn't possible on the Rev2. Fortunately, you can save programs wherever you want directly from the front panel. It does take a little bit of forethought, but in just a few minutes it's easy enough place programs sequentially so you only have to increment or decrement once to get to the next program you need. You can move programs freely without worrying about overwriting any factory sounds since we have both user and factory banks.
Yeah I can appreciate that. I can't tell from pictures but does the patch selector also have cursor buttons or is it only by a single scrolling knob?
-
Shall we resume this thread for the upcoming NAMM?
-
Shall we resume this thread for the upcoming NAMM?
Rev2 module.
We might have to resume this thread around Summer NAMM.
-
The Rev2 module is already out, so that's not the next new instrument. And Summer NAMM is basically a guitar show anyway.
-
But the interview with Dave in Kim Bjørn's Push Turn Move contains a vague hint:
-
"We are working on a product right now where we have moved things around quit a bit."
- Dave Smith
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I knew it! Dave's describing a Poly Evolver Keyboard Mk II with the control panel in the front and the keyboard in the back. I mean, what else could it be?
-
I knew it! Dave's describing a Poly Evolver Keyboard Mk II with the control panel in the front and the keyboard in the back.
To be blinded by the blue light?
-
It's meant to give us pencil-headed synthesists a more intimidating image - those red and blue flashing lights right under our chins.
-
It's meant to give us pencil-headed synthesists a more intimidating image - blue and red flashing lights right under our chins.
The sunglasses edition.
-
The sunglasses edition.
Bringing back the 80s....
https://youtu.be/X2LTL8KgKv8 (https://youtu.be/X2LTL8KgKv8)
-
Where we have moved things around quite a bit. Hmm tough to say really.
I hope we see a hybrid but I don't see it happening.
I'd love to see Vector Synthesis brought back but I doubt that'll ever happen again.
I hope we see multitimbrality but I don't see that happening ever.
I'd also love to see the Sequential name on it...but doubtful that will happen.
I just hope it's not a mono synth or something ridiculous like a 20 voice polysynth that's monotimbral.
-
I’m sure someone has said this already, but I would love to see a new take on a hardware sampler. Especially now that solid-state hard drives and decent sized screens are so reasonably priced.
- 3 OSC (selectable sample PCM or P12 style OSCs or maybe User defined wavetables)
- On screen sample editing and key mapping
- 12 voice, bi-timbral
- Generous mod matrix
- 4 LFOs
- 3 Envelopes
- OB6 / P6 style effects section
- 5 octave Keyboard
Call it the Prophet S12.
They couldn’t take my money fast enough.
-
I’m sure someone has said this already, but I would love to see a new take on a hardware sampler. Especially now that solid-state hard drives and decent sized screens are so reasonably priced.
- 3 OSC (selectable sample PCM or P12 style OSCs or maybe User defined wavetables)
- On screen sample editing and key mapping
- 12 voice, bi-timbral
- Generous mod matrix
- 4 LFOs
- 3 Envelopes
- OB6 / P6 style effects section
- 5 octave Keyboard
Call it the Prophet S12.
They couldn’t take my money fast enough.
I agree a new keyboard sampler would be fantastic but I think I see something like that coming from their Pioneer/DSI collaborations.
Screw this bi timbral stuff for a sampler it should be multitimbral because I want a 10 track sequencer on board.
I also think they should maybe get rid of the Prophet name for this one and call it the Sequential Mimic or Sequential Imitation.
-
Things that can be assumed about the next DSI synth, mostly by means of exclusion:
- rearranged interface/layout, which might indicate a different voice architecture or signal flow
- it will neither be white nor feature any faders (Dave emphasized his discontent with both in the Push Turn Move interview)
- it won't be an Evolver MKII if we take Robot Heart at his word
- it'll probably not be multitimbral
- it might not be called "Prophet" (if they find a better name) as Dave indicated at Moogfest, which can - again - signal a different voice architecture
- it won't be entirely digital
- it'll have a keyboard
-
Things that can be assumed about the next DSI synth, mostly by means of exclusion:
- rearranged interface/layout, which might indicate a different voice architecture or signal flow
- it will neither be white nor feature any faders (Dave emphasized his discontent with both in the Push Turn Move interview)
- it won't be an Evolver MKII if we take Robot Heart at his word
- it'll probably not be multitimbral
- it might not be called "Prophet" (if they find a better name) as Dave indicated at Moogfest, which can - again - signal a different voice architecture
- it won't be entirely digital
- it'll have a keyboard
I wonder if we will see an analog vocoder or analog guitar synth machine. It may not even be keyboard related...I doubt that’ll be the case but it still would be interesting to see.
-
One thing is certain... DSI needs to do something new next time because they have a new powerful analog synth now (REV2)... they have a powerful hybrid too (P12)... they have two boutique 6voice analogs too, and even a monosynth hybrid... as Dave is only doing BIG synths now (leaving the small ones for Pioneer obviously), he will need to come out with something different or things will start to overlap too much.
One of the most obvious routes and stuff he's missing on the inventory is something that utilize sampling technology in one way or another.... I've seen MANY people in here, come with "+1" when this has been talked about earlier, and I'm sure he's lurking us over the shoulders, if not by his employees if he's too messed up in the cellar "stirring the cauldron" for us all.
My intuition tells me we WILL se such a thing at some point... it is also a niche instrument that has no counterpart on the modern market.... a sampler synth with analog filters... there is no question it will be well received.
There could be other stuff too of course, but a sampling synthesizer made for performance would definitely hold it's own in DSI's range of devices... I certainly hope we will see one at some point.
And I would not be surprised if it is a modern version of his earlier Wavestation which was both popular, but also did crazy things with samples in it's time... it would definitely be the perfect name for a sampling synth, and with Dave's favoring of his earlier synths names, it would be plausible.... but only time will tell :)
-
One thing is certain... DSI needs to do something new next time because they have a new powerful analog synth now (REV2)... they have a powerful hybrid too (P12)... they have two boutique 6voice analogs too, and even a monosynth hybrid... as Dave is only doing BIG synths now (leaving the small ones for Pioneer obviously), he will need to come out with something different or things will start to overlap too much.
One of the most obvious routes and stuff he's missing on the inventory is something that utilize sampling technology in one way or another.... I've seen MANY people in here, come with "+1" when this has been talked about earlier, and I'm sure he's lurking us over the shoulders, if not by his employees if he's too messed up in the cellar "stirring the cauldron" for us all.
My intuition tells me we WILL se such a thing at some point... it is also a niche instrument that has no counterpart on the modern market.... a sampler synth with analog filters... there is no question it will be well received.
There could be other stuff too of course, but a sampling synthesizer made for performance would definitely hold it's own in DSI's range of devices... I certainly hope we will see one at some point.
And I would not be surprised if it is a modern version of his earlier Wavestation which was both popular, but also did crazy things with samples in it's time... it would definitely be the perfect name for a sampling synth, and with Dave's favoring of his earlier synths names, it would be plausible.... but only time will tell :)
I hate to say it but I think this Namm is going to sort of be crucial for DSI..especially with Korg releasing a new full sized polyphonic analog and maybe even some other people will as well...they need to do something out of left field and totally fresh..be it a new Evolver (hybrid with both Vector Synthesis and Sampling abilities), a multitimbral analog or a purely digital synth or sampling synth with analog oscillators.
Or it’ll be massively disappointing, uninspiring and redundant like an analog monophonic or something.
-
I wonder if we will see an analog vocoder or analog guitar synth machine. It may not even be keyboard related...I doubt that’ll be the case but it still would be interesting to see.
Nah, too niche. ARP already commited suicide with the Avatar - not that DSI is in a similar position as the sinking ship was back then, but still. I also thought guitar sales were declining according to Fender, Gibson, and Guitar Center - not sure whether this is just about bitter old men whining because they can't maximize profit anymore with their outdated business models while they pretend to mourn the absence of stereotypical Rock guitar heroes who were meant to serve as role models for the kids. Either way, I can't really see the need for an analog guitar synth. There are plenty of stomp boxes and processing tools out there including Roger Linn's AdrenaLinn.
A vocoder seems to be even more niche. I mean how often do people use vocoders? There are also dedicated stompboxes for this like the Electro Harmonix V256 for example, plus a couple of synths that provide a vocoder, like the System-8 or the microKORG.
-
....guitar sales were declining according to Fender, Gibson, and Guitar Center
Guitar sales for Fender / Gibson are declining because, except for their most expensive guitars, they make poorly constructed products that have largely shunned innovation for years. And even their top of the line models are out-performed by their competitors.
Try comparing a Les Paul to a PRS; or compare a Strat to a Suhr.
Also, the young kids’ Guitar idols these days play Ibanez / PRS / Schecter... not Strats and Les Paul’s.
And +1 for the modern VS / Sampler with analogue filters that’s coming down the pike....
-
And I would not be surprised if it is a modern version of his earlier Wavestation which was both popular, but also did crazy things with samples in it's time... it would definitely be the perfect name for a sampling synth, and with Dave's favoring of his earlier synths names, it would be plausible.... but only time will tell :)
You couldn't sample with a Wavestation, though. It was PCM-based. If one had an actual sampler and a Wavestation A/D (the one with stereo inputs), it was possible to use your own samples as if you would use 'external' PCM waves - something only a few tinkerers did. And this worked only in tandem with a sampler that needed to be MIDI-synced to the WS in order for the samples (here used as pseudo PCM waves) to be triggered in time. The huge plus was of course the wave sequencing and that it's a pad machine galore, the big letdown in comparison to the VS: the digital non-resonant filter.
The big problem with the Wavestation is that it sounds pretty dated these days due to what was used as a basis for the PCM waves, in particular for the later version that also contained all sorts of natural instruments like pianos, flutes, saxophones, and so on. So with regard to the mostly abstract nature of the VS waves, the predecessor actually sounds less dated I'd say - at least less dated than those sounds that are typically associated with ROMplers. The VS also sounds fuller and more powerful due to the analog filter.
-
Guitar sales for Fender / Gibson are declining because, except for their most expensive guitars, they make poorly constructed products that have largely shunned innovation for years. And even their top of the line models are out-performed by their competitors.
I know, I know, my comment was meant to be tongue in cheek.
-
Guitar sales for Fender / Gibson are declining because, except for their most expensive guitars, they make poorly constructed products that have largely shunned innovation for years. And even their top of the line models are out-performed by their competitors.
I know, I know, my comment was meant to be tongue in cheek.
You’re comment was right on point... I’ve just been bewildered for decades by Fender / Gibson running their businesses into the ground.
-
Guitar sales for Fender / Gibson are declining because, except for their most expensive guitars, they make poorly constructed products that have largely shunned innovation for years. And even their top of the line models are out-performed by their competitors.
I know, I know, my comment was meant to be tongue in cheek.
You’re comment was right on point... I’ve just been bewildered for decades by Fender / Gibson running their businesses into the ground.
Basically loads of bad business decisions. Here are two nice and well-written pieces by Eric Garland, who spent some time and plenty of articles analyzing the situation of Gibson and Guitar Center:
https://www.ericgarland.co/2016/09/27/gibson-rating-moodys/
https://www.ericgarland.co/2016/01/21/7-things-learned-guitar-center/
-
Gibson is actually $530 Million in debt and currently selling their Memphis plant. The issue is they are overcharging for a name and the quality isn’t meeting the price. Tuning issues, shoddy fret work, for the same price you could get a Tom Anderson or Suhr or B&G and have a guitar that destroys anything Gibson has put out 8n the past ten years.
Also I love the Andrenalinn iii...use it has my main guitar processor. I tend to record direct now but I’m still looking into Carr amps.
Back on topic though, I’m simply saying this will be the Namm where DSI will either do something unique or do something counter productive. It’ll be a damn shame if DSI come out with a Mono Synth or another analog mono timbral Poly Synth And Korg or someone comes out with something unique like multitimbral analog or something. I’d actually cry.
-
I'd be over the moon if a Wavestation type synth was released, but with analogue filters and user slots for waves (which can be sampled on board). I don't think Korg are going to do it, they seem fixed on new analogues.
With regards to envelopes, I'd like someone to do something a little different for once and have one voltage controlled ADSR envelope and one digital ADADSRR (or more) envelope that can be looped. Well actually two of each. And two joysticks.
The big problem with the Wavestation is that it sounds pretty dated these days due to what was used as a basis for the PCM waves, in particular for the later version that also contained all sorts of natural instruments like pianos, flutes, saxophones, and so on......
The SR seems like it was aimed at the performing musician who wasn't inclined to program wild and crazy patches but wanted access to the incredible pads that the WS could produce, yet at the same time get a hold of some more standard presets that would be more at home on a 01w or an M1 (not that either of those machines weren't able to do some fabulous sounding pads for the time). All those rather staid sound sources can be dispensed with in favour of more suitable waves for the sound designer.
-
What about:
- A product that can do sampling the old way (1999's Akai/EMU + analog filters / amps)
- Something that can do "granular synthesis", bit like these guys: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/844778849/gr-1-granular-synthesizer (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/844778849/gr-1-granular-synthesizer) combined with sampling/waves and analog filters / amps
- A variation on the existing Prophet 12 with Dolby Surround / Dolby Digital features and extensive "three dimensional" sound modulation / design (artists performing with Buchla instruments often use quadraphonic sound I believe)
-
And I would not be surprised if it is a modern version of his earlier Wavestation which was both popular, but also did crazy things with samples in it's time... it would definitely be the perfect name for a sampling synth, and with Dave's favoring of his earlier synths names, it would be plausible.... but only time will tell :)
You couldn't sample with a Wavestation, though. It was PCM-based. If one had an actual sampler and a Wavestation A/D (the one with stereo inputs), it was possible to use your own samples as if you would use 'external' PCM waves - something only a few tinkerers did. And this worked only in tandem with a sampler that needed to be MIDI-synced to the WS in order for the samples (here used as pseudo PCM waves) to be triggered in time. The huge plus was of course the wave sequencing and that it's a pad machine galore, the big letdown in comparison to the VS: the digital non-resonant filter.
The big problem with the Wavestation is that it sounds pretty dated these days due to what was used as a basis for the PCM waves, in particular for the later version that also contained all sorts of natural instruments like pianos, flutes, saxophones, and so on. So with regard to the mostly abstract nature of the VS waves, the predecessor actually sounds less dated I'd say - at least less dated than those sounds that are typically associated with ROMplers. The VS also sounds fuller and more powerful due to the analog filter.
I was not hinting at a Wavestation clone or even an update for that matter... I was solely thinking about the name itself... Dave also made reuse of the "Prophet" name, but the architecture is nowhere near the Prophet 5 or other Prophets he has made in the past.... I was simply suggesting a sample synth with the name "Wavestation" in it somehow, but probably a very different engine, maybe even based on something new and unique.... if it's just an upped Wavestation without sampling and storage etc. I would not even consider it in any way.... what I lack in synthesis right now is something sample based, where I can use my OWN samples in an intuitive and easily manageable way and with the usual FULL DSI SysEx package :) (I know the samples cannot be stored with the SysEx, but maybe in a flash based way for the samples, like on the Blofeld).
The way I'd like to see the sample storage done is somewhat like this:
One huge GB flash storage medium inside the sampler, just like with the Elektron machines PlusDrive.
No need for SD or other physical medium... use USB connection for transfers between DAW and storage.
Samples stored in a directory fashion so you can manage them comfortably.
DAW friendly filesystem so that you can see the drive from a DAW and copy files to/from the internal sample storage
The preset SysEx should have a pointer to the samples used on the internal drive (the samples file path)
Using this way, the SysEx not having samples included will still be a good compromise... it's basically a "ROM'pler" in a user definable GB large "Flash ROM"... the reason for using filename paths in the SysEx is that if you use indexing instead, every sample on the drive would have to be located in a specific order, which would be very inconvenient when you want to make adjustment to the samples on the drive, or rearrange them on the drive. With a dedicated editor for this, combining this with automatic dumping of samples to a DAW via USB could even provide a very nice and convenient way to save presets on your DAW with the samples included, and would be easily dump'able back to the machine.
The key is, that the storage form must be intuitive and easy to mange, while still providing you with the abillity to use the sampler stand alone and away from the DAW (for live performance situations)... the internal Flash HD solution would be convenient in this matter... the size will accommodate all the needs for a performer playing live, and he would not need to carry small SD card along to load and save from during a gig... everything is inside the sampler in flash, and he can prepare it at home with his DAW using such a dedicated editor.
Just my two cents...
-
I'd be over the moon if a Wavestation type synth was released, but with analogue filters and user slots for waves (which can be sampled on board). I don't think Korg are going to do it, they seem fixed on new analogues.
Plus: they released the iWavestation last year.
With regards to envelopes, I'd like someone to do something a little different for once and have one voltage controlled ADSR envelope and one digital ADADSRR (or more) envelope that can be looped. Well actually two of each.
That would be a nice addition.
The SR seems like it was aimed at the performing musician who wasn't inclined to program wild and crazy patches but wanted access to the incredible pads that the WS could produce, yet at the same time get a hold of some more standard presets that would be more at home on a 01w or an M1 (not that either of those machines weren't able to do some fabulous sounding pads for the time). All those rather staid sound sources can be dispensed with in favour of more suitable waves for the sound designer.
True. I basically had the update from the original to the EX version in mind, which included more ROM waves, particularly rather conventional ones that were often seen as a concession to the ROMpler market.
-
I was not hinting at a Wavestation clone or even an update for that matter... I was solely thinking about the name itself...
Gotcha.
-
What about:
- A product that can do sampling the old way (1999's Akai/EMU + analog filters / amps)
- Something that can do "granular synthesis", bit like these guys: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/844778849/gr-1-granular-synthesizer (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/844778849/gr-1-granular-synthesizer) combined with sampling/waves and analog filters / amps
- A variation on the existing Prophet 12 with Dolby Surround / Dolby Digital features and extensive "three dimensional" sound modulation / design (artists performing with Buchla instruments often use quadraphonic sound I believe)
Good point with the surround sound. I'd like to see the quadraphonic outputs of the Wavestation being used instead of individual layer A and B outputs, granted one could spatially navigate the four oscillators with a joystick.
-
As far as a name goes
Sequential Mimic
or
Sequential Imitator.
I just think it's something as simple as taking the concept of the Korg Microsampler, make it a 5 octave keyboard (even 4 octaves is fine for me personally), add DSI filters on it and include a 8 track Multitrack sequencer on board.
-
I'd love to see Vector Synthesis brought back but I doubt that'll ever happen again.
I would love to see vector synthesis reimagined with todays technology. After all the joystick is just bilinear interpolation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilinear_interpolation) and we got way more computer resources available for instruments these days. Reconsidering how waveforms are rendered and allow for morphing wavetables would be great!
-
Something that can do "granular synthesis" [...]
That would be great!
-
Guitar sales for Fender / Gibson are declining because, except for their most expensive guitars, they make poorly constructed products that have largely shunned innovation for years. And even their top of the line models are out-performed by their competitors.
I know, I know, my comment was meant to be tongue in cheek.
You’re comment was right on point... I’ve just been bewildered for decades by Fender / Gibson running their businesses into the ground.
I don't think Fenders are as bad as Gibsons, you can get a decent MIJ fender for an ok price less than $1500, to get a decent Gibson you are looking at over $4000 dollars as far as I can see, I have a couple of Gibsons over the $4000 mark and compared to nearly any other manufacturer at the same price point they are pretty crap. On one the fret ends were not even rounded off!
Basically if you want a Fender get a Suhr or a G&L and if you want a Gibson get anything else!
-
Basically if you want a Fender get a Suhr or a G&L and if you want a Gibson get anything else!
Yep, agreed - G&L is the best option for Fender loyalists in the modern era; sadly, there is no Gibson equivalent in terms of lineage and quality.
And you're right, newer buyers just don't care to buy a Gibson or Epiphone when there are so many decent alternatives that provide better finish quality and performance for the $/£/€.
-
I would love to see vector synthesis reimagined with todays technology. After all the joystick is just bilinear interpolation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilinear_interpolation) and we got way more computer resources available for instruments these days. Reconsidering how waveforms are rendered and allow for morphing wavetables would be great!
Would you suggest a different controller instead of a joystick?
-
Would you suggest a different controller instead of a joystick?
These days a 2D/3D touch surface may do the same better and easier with potentially better long term stability.
However, I was primarily thinking about voice architecture. Interpolation of waveforms inside single oscillator will allow for a much more expressive voice compared to the VS approach of interpolation between the output of four oscillators. Also, morphing oscillator waveshapes would allow for PPG like sound/features.
-
Would you suggest a different controller instead of a joystick?
Never been a fan of the joystick on a synth... polyphonic aftertouch on the other hand.... 8)
-
These days a 2D/3D touch surface may do the same better and easier with potentially better long term stability.
Yeah, so maybe a tactile 5D surface that responds to horizontal and vertical slides, pressure, velocity, and release.
However, I was primarily thinking about voice architecture. Interpolation of waveforms inside single oscillator will allow for a much more expressive voice compared to the VS approach of interpolation between the output of four oscillators. Also, morphing oscillator waveshapes would allow for PPG like sound/features.
Waveforms as a modulation destination would indeed be a nice feature.
-
Basically if you want a Fender get a Suhr or a G&L and if you want a Gibson get anything else!
Yep, agreed - G&L is the best option for Fender loyalists in the modern era; sadly, there is no Gibson equivalent in terms of lineage and quality.
And you're right, newer buyers just don't care to buy a Gibson or Epiphone when there are so many decent alternatives that provide better finish quality and performance for the $/£/€.
Tom Anderson makes both Strat, tele and Les Paul style guitars and are easily the best I’ve played.
-
The Pro 2 is no more the new Mono Evolver Keyboard than the Prophet 12 is the new Poly Evolver Keyboard. These are totally different instrument lines, and the mere fact that they're both hybrids means very little. The Evolver line has not been replaced, and it remains an enthusiastic topic of discussion whether or not DSI will ever actually replace it.
When the Pro 2 first came out, I pressed hard for a module version. To this day, I still wish it existed, because if it did, I would make a Pro 2 Keyboard-Module pair my definitive longed-for mono synth. But DSI has repeatedly said they will not produce a module version. Anyway, if they were going to, it certainly would have happened by now. They always announce a module version well within a year of presenting a new keyboard synthesizer, and the Pro 2 has been out for several years now.
On the other hand, there are sometimes surprising discrepancies between what Dave Smith says and what Dave Smith does, so no one of us can say for certain. Personally, I would be thrilled if DSI finally produced a Pro 2 Module, but I'm not expecting it to happen.
-
The Pro 2 is no more the new Mono Evolver Keyboard than the Prophet 12 is the new Poly Evolver Keyboard. These are totally different instrument lines, and the mere fact that they're both hybrids means very little. The Evolver line has not been replaced, and it remains an enthusiastic topic of discussion whether or not DSI will ever actually replace it.
One might argue, though, that the Pro 2 is closer related to the Evolvers than the Prophet 12 insofar as it has a sequencer that is in itself far more powerful than the one in the Evolvers. The only aspects that make the Pro 2 different from the Evolvers is that it has no DCOs, no stereo input, no ring mod, no dedicated noise source, and no stereo filter, the latter of which would have become quite expensive given the discreet circuit of the Pro 2 filters.
-
It's not that there are no similarities between the Pro 2 and the MEK, but that there are outstanding differences. The lack of stereo oscillators and filters is substantial, but much more is the different set of timbres available from the wave shapes; plus the Evolver's famous digital aliasing. My point is, the voice of each is very different, even if you can find similarities on their respective spec sheets.
I've listened to every Pro 2 video over and over again, because I really like the instrument and am still intrigued by it. In fact, I'm constantly trying to imagine some configuration in which I could work it into my set up. I could imagine it complimenting a Poly Evolver quite well. But I've never thought while listening to YouTube, "now there's a replacement for the MEK".
-
It's not that there are no similarities between the Pro 2 and the MEK, but that there are outstanding differences. The lack of stereo oscillators and filters is substantial, but much more is the different set of timbres available from the wave shapes; plus the Evolver's famous digital aliasing. My point is, the voice of each is very different, even if you can find similarities on their respective spec sheets.
I've listened to every Pro 2 video over and over again, because I really like the instrument and am still intrigued by it. But I've never thought, "now there's a replacement for the MEK".
Sure, they both don't sound the same and have their own unique advantages and limitations. I just wanted to point out why the Pro 2 could be considered closer related to the Evolvers than all the other DSI instruments. In the continuum that spans from players to tweakers, the Pro 2 is definitely highest on the tweaker list, maybe followed by the Tempest, and the the Prophet 12.
-
What mystifies me about DSI is that they have never reproduced in other instruments the stereo aspects of the Evolvers. I believe I remember Robot Heart himself saying he'd like to see it return as well, but Dave has chosen not to do so. It boggles the mind that such an outstanding feature - which can be eliminated from each patch if you didn't want it - should still be missing from all the instruments that followed the Evolvers. Granted, DSI has at least several times included B outputs, but that's an awkward compromise with the feature.
-
What mystifies me about DSI is that they have never reproduced in other instruments the stereo aspects of the Evolvers.
A stereo panning stack mode working much like the Evolver (by configuring a pair of voices from layer A) would be far more expressive and offer much better use of hardware resources than a fixed stereo panned voice.
-
However you go about a stereo signal path, whether done like in the Evolvers or via a dedicated stack mode, you would still need twice as many filters. The latter would add to the cost more significantly, as there are way more parts involved in the discreet filter designs of the Pro 2, Prophet-6, and OB-6. Those are all not based on the comparatively simple synth on a chip basis the Curtis chips provide.
-
I just wanted to point out why the Pro 2 could be considered closer related to the Evolvers than all the other DSI instruments.
That's true; I agree. I remember - I believe it was when the Poly Evolver Rack was first retired, but then DSI issued another batch of them - that the company released a comment that Evolver fans were "cult-like" in their attachment to the instrument. That's a hyperbolic way of admitting that the Evolver is unique. But it still is, all these new instruments later.
I've had a Poly Evolver Keyboard sitting on Craigslist for over a month now. It's just killing me to keep it there. One person contacted me the other night and asked what I intended to buy instead, and I told him a Prophet 12. His response was, "What? A Poly Evolver is much better than a Prophet 12!" He had owned both but sold the latter. it's an opinion that I come across often enough, and it's hard not to share it.
The Prophet 12 is a superb instrument. I think I've made that clear that it's my sincere opinion. But the one thing that struck me during the summer was that it's not really a sonically recognizable instrument. It's range is so vast that, in the end, it seems a bit generic. It's like trying to know and love a person with multiple-personality disorder! Very different from this, the Poly Evolver is so recognizable. I realize some folks might find this to be a disadvantage, but I rather like it. It comes with some limitations, but I quite like limitations. So the argument remains that the Poly Evolver needs to be resuscitated. There still is nothing else like it.
-
However you go about a stereo signal path, whether done like in the Evolvers or via a dedicated stack mode, you would still need twice as many filters. The latter would add to the cost more significantly, as there are way more parts involved in the discreet filter designs of the Pro 2, Prophet-6, and OB-6. Those are all not based on the comparatively simple synth on a chip basis the Curtis chips provide.
My issue is much more with the oscillators than with the filter. And by the way, stereo chorus cannot compare. Still, I would consider your comments to be a good argument for issuing an instrument again with a simpler filter - as in a 2-pole/4-pole low pass and a non-resonant high pass, nothing more. If that would significantly keep down the costs, than do it.
The problem from my perspective is that everything today is about an immense number of features, often at the expense of the overall sound. Stereo has to do, not with quantity of features, but with quality of sound.
I can appreciate that a two-oscillator instrument may not be the right place for stereo hardwired oscillators (although a stack feature would change this). But I think a four-oscillator instrument should have it, and is rather impoverished without it.
When I first set up the Prophet 12 in my music room this past summer, my first response to the sound was, "Blah!" At that point, after one hour, I was ready to return it. But then I decided to give it the old Evolver stereo treatment. Only then did I begin to love the sound.
-
However you go about a stereo signal path, whether done like in the Evolvers or via a dedicated stack mode, you would still need twice as many filters.
That is exactly the point: giving the users the choice between stereo panned voices or the normal layer modes. And yes, it costs twice the number of voices to stereo pan them. Big surprise! Nothing new under the sun! ;)
-
I can appreciate that a two-oscillator instrument may not be the right place for stereo hardwired oscillators (although a stack feature would change this).
There are some interactions between the two parts of each Evolver voice: oscillator sync, common modulations. But overall its still just a pair of voices being played together. Which means that "hardwired" is not completely precise. Or said in another way: there are limits to how many changes are needed to implement stereo panned voices as a layer mode on existing instruments.
-
I've had a Poly Evolver Keyboard sitting on Craigslist for over a month now. It's just killing me to keep it there. One person contacted me the other night and asked what I intended to buy instead, and I told him a Prophet 12. His response was, "What? A Poly Evolver is much better than a Prophet 12!" He had owned both but sold the latter. it's an opinion that I come across often enough, and it's hard not to share it.
Oh, I've come across several comments like that. Some even go as far to say that DSI never really released anything new since the Evolvers, only limited or specialized derivatives of it. I wouldn't agree, as this ignores some significant details and design choices. But I guess it can be said that the Evolver served as a sort of template throughout DSI's history if you exclude the VCO-based synths.
The problem from my perspective is that everything today is about an immense number of features, often at the expense of the overall sound. Stereo has to do, not with quantity of features, but with quality of sound.
I agree on the number of features not being the most important aspect. Ideally, it should be about how clever and imaginative they've been implemented, not about whether you have 2 or 4 LFOs, or 5 or 20 mod slots.
-
There are some interactions between the two parts of each Evolver voice: oscillator sync, common modulations. But overall its still just a pair of voices being played together. Which means that "hardwired" is not completely precise. Or said in another way: there are limits to how many changes are needed to implement stereo panned voices as a layer mode on existing instruments.
In using the expression "hardwired," I'm only borrowing the exact same word that Dave Smith has used. But I'm glad you mentioned it, because it's worth repeating for the sake of others that the Evolvers have a parameter for adjusting the stereo depth, or completely eliminating it so that the instrument has a strictly mono field. That's one way of improving oscillator beating, which obviously weakens as you increasingly separate the oscillators. Hence, having stereo makes some sense with a two-oscillator instrument, but much more sense with a four-oscillator.
My point is, I don't see how you can lose with this feature, since it's entirely adjustable.
-
I've had a Poly Evolver Keyboard sitting on Craigslist for over a month now. It's just killing me to keep it there. One person contacted me the other night and asked what I intended to buy instead, and I told him a Prophet 12. His response was, "What? A Poly Evolver is much better than a Prophet 12!" He had owned both but sold the latter. it's an opinion that I come across often enough, and it's hard not to share it.
Oh, I've come across several comments like that. Some even go as far to say that DSI never really released anything new since the Evolvers, only limited or specialized derivatives of it. I wouldn't agree, as this ignores some significant details and design choices. But I guess it can be said that the Evolver served as a sort of template throughout DSI's history if you exclude the VCO-based synths.
My opinion isn't that extreme. I think the Prophet 12 and Pro 2 are totally distinct instruments from the Evolvers, and that has been my point over and over again. It's true, even regarding the Prophet '08. It was extracted - that's a fact - but it still is and sounds significantly different. But the guy's opinion was that, from his experience, he would prefer an eight-voice Poly Evolver Keyboard to a Prophet 12. He didn't carry on about it, so he was no fanatic. I'm only repeating the opinion because I've read it many times. And now, having had the instruments side-by-side for a full month, I appreciate it. In fact, the reason I still want a Prophet 12 is that it's so dissimilar to a Poly Evolver Keyboard. I could conceive of having the two instruments at the same time, but I don't need that much digital potential all at once.
Paul, what I need to do is import you to my music room and lock you in it for one full month of uninterrupted eight-voice Poly Evolver joy. You can't eat, drink, wash, or communicate with anyone until the month is up, but I will leave you with a bucket. You might end up appreciating our view a little more than you would expect.
-
But I'm glad you mentioned it, because it's worth repeating for the sake of others that the Evolvers have a parameter for adjusting the stereo depth, or completely eliminating it so that the instrument has a strictly mono field.
Even when the Evolver have a "mono field" its still playing its pair of voices on each note. So no, I am not missing something here.
Its just that there is a difference between how a pair of hardware voices are panned versus the number of hardware voices being played at the same time. Evolver always plays a pair of hardware voices for each note being played. Prophet 12 and Rev 2 supports playing either one or two hardware voices for each note being played.
So we are talking about two different things here: I talk about hardware voices whereas you talk about sound.
-
So we are talking about two different things here: I talk about hardware voices whereas you talk about sound.
I get the "two-voices" part, but the result is my concern. As a musician, that is admittedly all I'm ever talking about - the sound.
-
My opinion isn't that extreme. I think the Prophet 12 and Pro 2 are totally distinct instruments from the Evolvers, and that has been my point over and over again. [...]
I don't expect folks to understand it.
I am sorry to report that I agree completely with you: The Evolver have something special in its voice. If you ask me its partly the oscillator types and partly its lovely digital dirt.
I think what happened was that Prophet 12 and Pro 2 tried to make better digital oscillators than the noisy digital oscillators on the Evolver. But the sonic character of their digital oscillators have maybe not quite as much impact as on the Evolver. Plus that having no analog oscillators costs some sonic impact too.
In summary: cracking that oscillator nut is very very hard!
And as a musician, that is admittedly all I'm ever talking about.
And as a technical minded person I do take technical considerations into account too. Not at least including potential interesting solutions for future designs. Sound is indeed very important. But maybe there are better and more flexible ways to arrive at a good sound. Hence my stereo panned layer mode suggestion.
-
My opinion isn't that extreme. I think the Prophet 12 and Pro 2 are totally distinct instruments from the Evolvers, and that has been my point over and over again. [...]
I don't expect folks to understand it.
I am sorry to report that I agree completely with you: The Evolver have something special in its voice. If you ask me its partly the oscillator types and partly its lovely digital dirt.
;D ;D ;D And I agree with you about the so-called "digital dirt." I didn't like it for a long time, but it's grown on me. It's always sticking its ice-cold nose into my music when I'm not wanting it. But then, in listening back afterwards, it often seems mysteriously beautiful, like snow or mist.
Regarding our "differences" between an emphasis on the technical or the musical, both are obviously necessary. You can't have one without the other. So we really don't have a disagreement.
-
My opinion isn't that extreme. I think the Prophet 12 and Pro 2 are totally distinct instruments from the Evolvers, and that has been my point over and over again. It's true, even regarding the Prophet '08. It was extracted - that's a fact - but it still is and sounds significantly different. But the guy's opinion was that, from his experience, he would prefer an eight-voice Poly Evolver Keyboard to a Prophet 12. He didn't carry on about it, so he was no fanatic. I'm only repeating the opinion because I've read it many times. And now, having had the instruments side-by-side for a full month, I appreciate it. In fact, the reason I still want a Prophet 12 is that it's so dissimilar to a Poly Evolver Keyboard. I could conceive of having the two instruments at the same time, but I don't need that much digital potential all at once.
Paul, what I need to do is import you to my music room and lock you in it for one full month of uninterrupted eight-voice Poly Evolver joy. You can't eat, drink, wash, or communicate with anyone until the month is up, but I will leave you with a bucket. You might end up appreciating our view a little more than you would expect.
While I would really like to play an 8-voice Evolver one day, I should point out that I'm fully aware of the sonic differences. After all, I used to own a MEK and Desktop Evolver combo, which did sound unique. In fact, if the Pro 2 had never been released, I would have saved for a PER to polychain it to my MEK. But PERs were already hard to come by and also very expensive.
I accept the fact that there is no synth that covers it all (which is a good thing in my book) and overall the Pro 2 was the best choice for me in terms of sound, price, and features. That doesn't mean, though, that I think it does fully replace the Evolver or that it is objectively the better synth. Both have their advantages and strengths. The stereo signal path, front end hybrid structure, and VS waveshapes on the Evolver, and the filters, paraphonic mode, sequencer, and overall interface design improvements on the Pro 2 to name a few. The reason I ultimately made a choice in favor of the Pro 2 has to do with the fact that I like limitations and don't want to be in a position where I end up with too many synths I had to choose.
@Sacred Synthesis and dslsynth:
If you don't mind, I will separate these lasts posts from this thread, since we've gotten a little off track. I suggest to move them over to the next DSI synth discussion, which seems to resonate more with the points that were covered.
-
Note: I inserted parts of a discussion that arose from the thread "Additional Feature Request List" in the Pro 2 forum. They seemed to fit better in here, as the past and future (the future's past, the past's future?) of the Evolver has also been discussed in this thread.
-
I think synthesizers are sort of in a hampster wheel now. I think musicians are longing for “the next thing” to add sonically to their pallet and it seems we are either getting bombarded with monosynths or mini keys or companies are sort of stagnating creatively. The REV2 as great as it is, is a step backwards. It’s relying on an old synth model and updating it..nothing wrong with that I suppose but I’d much rather see a new Prophet model instead of an update of an old one. Regardless though I understand from a business aspect why they did it and it does sound good at the end of the day.
Another issue though is lack of support for older instruments. If DSI want to consider the P12, P6 and OB6 finished products they should come on this forum and say so as opposed to people asking for features for years. No sequencer midi out from the P6 and OB6? Lack of a pratical transposing Of The sequence (without having to hold down Rec) not only have these requests been put on the backburner but their new Rev2 synth still has these things missing!
We will have to see what Korg is going to do with their new synth but I don’t have high hopes. A monotimbral or bi timbral minilogue with full-size keys may sound cool on paper but it still is not offering anything new.
Moog is non existent in the equation and haven’t done anything majorly creative in a while and likely have nothing planned.
I just think a company like DSI should be ahead of the curve of everyone else and keep offering the next step up...be it different forms of synthesis, hybrids, samplers, or just start to seriously consider at least four part multitimbrality.
Another analog mono? Another mono or bi timbral analog poly...it’s redundancy.
I saw a meme once where a gentleman was showing a girl the Schmidt synthesizer and the speech bubble wrote “You take two oscillators and detune them.” Her response: “Then what?”
I think that’s what a lot of people, including myself are at right now. “Then what?”
-
Moog is non existent in the equation and haven’t done anything majorly creative in a while and likely have nothing planned.
I certainly hope Moog doesn't go the way of the Dodo... but I see them now where Gibson has been: holding on to a past that has passed.
-
Moog is non existent in the equation and haven’t done anything majorly creative in a while and likely have nothing planned.
I certainly hope Moog doesn't go the way of the Dodo... but I see them now where Gibson has been: holding on to a past that has passed.
I 100% agree. Even when Bob Moog was running things they were constantly coming out with things be it a Moog Vocoder or Polymoog or whatever now in 2017 they are charging $4000-6000 on a monosynth with no memory, sequencer or...well..anything. I’d happily pay $3000-$4000 for a four voice Polyphonic Moog but no way am I going to spend that type of cash on “but it’s vintage” type mentality.
I think a lot of it has to do with whenever they do something different like the Tarus Foot Pedals or Moog Guitar they are commercial failures so they are worried about stepping outside their comfort zone...but you can still experiment within that comfort zone...that’s what they seem to be forgetting.
-
I think synthesizers are sort of in a hampster wheel now. I think musicians are longing for “the next thing” to add sonically to their pallet and it seems we are either getting bombarded with monosynths or mini keys or companies are sort of stagnating creatively.
You can't really reinvent the wheel. Synths and different forms of synthesis - mostly the substractive type - are well established by now. But basically there are lots of different things around already and have been for a couple of years, from West Coast to East Coast and everything in between, granular synthesis, sample-based synthesis, FM, AM, additive synthesis, and so on and so forth. Add to that the various and increasing controllers and philosophies. I think the future of electronic music will not be so much about new types of synthesis, but rather the development of new types of interfaces until the ultimate goal is reached in the shape and form of a direct-to-brain interface.
I just think a company like DSI should be ahead of the curve of everyone else and keep offering the next step up...be it different forms of synthesis, hybrids, samplers, or just start to seriously consider at least four part multitimbrality.
I think multitimbrality has become a rather demographic topic. Like someone posted on Muff Wiggler recently:
it isn't technically hard to do. I think it doesn't happen because
- it wasn't on most vintage analogs
- it requires additional physical interface ($) or menu diving ("eew, menus")
- the industry is under the (mistaken) impression that it isn't necessary because computers have unlimited audio tracks
- younger users are unfamiliar with the concept and therefore aren't asking for it
It has come to my attention as well that with the exception of musicians who where around in the 1980s or 1990s, no one really cares that much about multitimbrality anymore. MIDI even became a four-letter word among lots of young musicians. I've witnessed it often enough. MIDI-wise, almost all standard synths from the 1990s were way more advanced than today's synths. The market has shifted. I'm not saying that this is good or bad. Just an observation.
-
Moog is non existent in the equation and haven’t done anything majorly creative in a while and likely have nothing planned.
I certainly hope Moog doesn't go the way of the Dodo... but I see them now where Gibson has been: holding on to a past that has passed.
I 100% agree. Even when Bob Moog was running things they were constantly coming out with things be it a Moog Vocoder or Polymoog or whatever now in 2017 they are charging $4000-6000 on a monosynth with no memory, sequencer or...well..anything. I’d happily pay $3000-$4000 for a four voice Polyphonic Moog but no way am I going to spend that type of cash on “but it’s vintage” type mentality.
I think a lot of it has to do with whenever they do something different like the Tarus Foot Pedals or Moog Guitar they are commercial failures so they are worried about stepping outside their comfort zone...but you can still experiment within that comfort zone...that’s what they seem to be forgetting.
Don't forget, though, that Moog's palette is still rather wide. You also need to count in their apps, particularly the Animoog and the Model 15, which make use of state-of-the-art technology. And that they revised the Sub 37 to release the Subsequent 37 was due to customer feedback, that's all. They do super expensive modulars, mid-priced mono synths that don't need to hide in terms of features, did the Minimoog reissue people begged for for decades, have a whole range of effect pedals both for the synth and guitar market, sneaked into the Eurorack format, and do the aforementioned apps. That's quite a product range for such a relatively small company.
-
I think synthesizers are sort of in a hampster wheel now. I think musicians are longing for “the next thing” to add sonically to their pallet and it seems we are either getting bombarded with monosynths or mini keys or companies are sort of stagnating creatively.
You can't really reinvent the wheel. Synths and different forms of synthesis - mostly the substractive type - are well established by now. But basically there are lots of different things around already and have been for a couple of years, from West Coast to East Coast and everything in between, granular synthesis, sample-based synthesis, FM, AM, additive synthesis, and so on and so forth. Add to that the various and increasing controllers and philosophies. I think the future of electronic music will not be so much about new types of synthesis, but rather the development of new types of interfaces until the ultimate goal is reached in the shape and form of a direct-to-brain interface.
I just think a company like DSI should be ahead of the curve of everyone else and keep offering the next step up...be it different forms of synthesis, hybrids, samplers, or just start to seriously consider at least four part multitimbrality.
I think multitimbrality has become a rather demographic topic. Like someone posted on Muff Wiggler recently:
it isn't technically hard to do. I think it doesn't happen because
- it wasn't on most vintage analogs
- it requires additional physical interface ($) or menu diving ("eew, menus")
- the industry is under the (mistaken) impression that it isn't necessary because computers have unlimited audio tracks
- younger users are unfamiliar with the concept and therefore aren't asking for it
It has come to my attention as well that with the exception of musicians who where around in the 1980s or 1990s, no one really cares that much about multitimbrality anymore. MIDI even became a four-letter word among lots of young musicians. I've witnessed it often enough. MIDI-wise, almost all standard synths from the 1990s were way more advanced than today's synths. The market has shifted. I'm not saying that this is good or bad. Just an observation.
When I say different forms of synthesis I mean synthesis other than analog like Vector Synthesis. Not saying you have to reinvent the wheel but just offer something different.
Surely Four Part Multitimbrality isn’t so much to ask for. We aren’t asking for 20 channels like a workstation lol. Just something more than just a single split point. Sure you can do all that with midi and multiple synths or multitracking but that doesn’t mean it’s better persay.
-
When I say different forms of synthesis I mean synthesis other than analog like Vector Synthesis. Not saying you have to reinvent the wheel but just offer something different.
I understand that. But there's loads of stuff out there. Not always in the shape and form of a keyboard synth, but it exists, especially in software and Eurorack.
Surely Four Part Multitimbrality isn’t so much to ask for. We aren’t asking for 20 channels like a workstation lol. Just something more than just a single split point. Sure you can do all that with midi and multiple synths or multitracking but that doesn’t mean it’s better persay.
Even non-workstations came with standard 16 part multitimbrality in the 1990s, though. These days, mostly the devices in the beatbox format (Tempest, Analog Four, etc) cater to multitimbral needs.
-
Moog is non existent in the equation and haven’t done anything majorly creative in a while and likely have nothing planned.
I certainly hope Moog doesn't go the way of the Dodo... but I see them now where Gibson has been: holding on to a past that has passed.
I 100% agree. Even when Bob Moog was running things they were constantly coming out with things be it a Moog Vocoder or Polymoog or whatever now in 2017 they are charging $4000-6000 on a monosynth with no memory, sequencer or...well..anything. I’d happily pay $3000-$4000 for a four voice Polyphonic Moog but no way am I going to spend that type of cash on “but it’s vintage” type mentality.
I think a lot of it has to do with whenever they do something different like the Tarus Foot Pedals or Moog Guitar they are commercial failures so they are worried about stepping outside their comfort zone...but you can still experiment within that comfort zone...that’s what they seem to be forgetting.
Don't forget, though, that Moog's palette is still rather wide. You also need to count in their apps, particularly the Animoog and the Model 15, which make use of state-of-the-art technology. And that they revised the Sub 37 to release the Subsequent 37 was due to customer feedback, that's all. They do super expensive modulars, mid-priced mono synths that don't need to hide in terms of features, did the Minimoog reissue people begged for for decades, have a whole range of effect pedals both for the synth and guitar market, sneaked into the Eurorack format, and do the aforementioned apps. That's quite a product range for such a relatively small company.
But essentially it’s the same idea behind each of those things: A monophonic analog synth. Just in different sizes and shapes but they all produce a similar outcome.
For the amount of research and development and manufacturing they put into simply adding CV capabilities to an already existing synth they could have come out with a whole new product which included those requested features. Which is exactly what shouldn’t have happened with the REV2 a lot of the requests about the sequencer on the P6 and OB6 weren’t updated or addressed in a new product so now now only have those requests not been addressed on the older instruments but now they have to be addressed with the new one and from my understanding still havent.
-
When I say different forms of synthesis I mean synthesis other than analog like Vector Synthesis. Not saying you have to reinvent the wheel but just offer something different.
I understand that. But there's loads of stuff out there. Not always in the shape and form of a keyboard synth, but it exists, especially in software and Eurorack.
Surely Four Part Multitimbrality isn’t so much to ask for. We aren’t asking for 20 channels like a workstation lol. Just something more than just a single split point. Sure you can do all that with midi and multiple synths or multitracking but that doesn’t mean it’s better persay.
Even non-workstations came with standard 16 part multitimbrality in the 1990s, though. These days, mostly the devices in the beatbox format (Tempest, Analog Four, etc) cater to multitimbral needs.
Sure those things exist in software and modular stuff but why not keyboards? Surely if Behringer And Korg And others can do analog for less than $1000 Yamaha could have come out with a new DX that wasn’t the size of a toy. In fact if Yamaha can do an authentic FM engine in a reface size instrument there I should no reason they can’t come out with one in a 61 key full sized keyboard.
These are obviously questions we can’t answer but it is still a good question.
-
But essentially it’s the same idea behind each of those things: A monophonic analog synth. Just in different sizes and shapes but they all produce a similar outcome.
The Animoog is pretty much its own thing and - just like the Model 15 app - it can also be played polyphonically. The rest is just what they do and as long as there's a demand for it, they will continue to do so. After all, it's a business and they also like the concept of a single voice synth. Maybe they come out with something different again in the app sphere for reasons of cost and flexibility. One thing they don't really need to do is develop an analog poly synth. Because what would you get realistically? Something like the Prophet-6 with a Moog filter for about the same price or $1000 more. In terms of technology and already available options, I could think of more exciting things to be honest.
For the amount of research and development and manufacturing they put into simply adding CV capabilities to an already existing synth they could have come out with a whole new product which included those requested features.
They redesigned the signal path of the Sub 37. Everything was based on customer demand and suggestions. Again: It's a business and this is also how they showed their appreciation towards the user base. They are also a small company with in-house production. Things take a bit longer under these circumstances. And who knows what they've been working on behind the scenes?
-
Sure those things exist in software and modular stuff but why not keyboards?
Because it's less risky to do more esoteric or experimental stuff in those areas. It's niche products for a niche market. You can't expect a company releasing a >$3,000 synth that blows big time in the end because its concept is too unfamiliar to most musicians. Synths like the DX7 or the D-50 were a success because they contained outstanding presets (for their time), not really because most musicians embraced a new way of programming as it turned out. It was also the birth of the preset library market for that very reason. Sure, there are also always a couple of nerds who dig deeper than that, but I doubt that they were the masses that paid Yamaha's and Roland's bills.
Surely if Behringer And Korg And others can do analog for less than $1000 Yamaha could have come out with a new DX that wasn’t the size of a toy. In fact if Yamaha can do an authentic FM engine in a reface size instrument there I should no reason they can’t come out with one in a 61 key full sized keyboard.
It's called the Montage, which was surely marketed in the wrong way when it comes to what you're asking for, but it definitely contains a fully-fledged FM engine. The Korg Kronos does too.
-
Actually I was thinking in terms of Moog is their own version of the Oberheim Four Voice but with four Slim Phatty’s or Sub 37 engines that can operate individually from each other and each have presets. Sure you can do that with midi and polychaining but it at least would offer something different than the DSI instruments and be something fresh from Moog.
In terms of the Yamaha Montage I am talking about a dedicated FM synth not a synth that has samples, fm and other things going on. Just two DX reface engines under one hood. Ironically I think that would actually sell better than the reface and Montage.
-
Still advocating for a sampling keyboard here! (Prophet 2000/ V2018 ect?)
Sampling front end and VCF's and VCA's.
Plenty of front panel knobs for the main performance control.
8 voice/4 part multi is ok here but the more specs the better of course. (Price notwithstanding!)
Sequencer of some descript on board.
Keeping a keen eye for the future!
-
Still advocating for a sampling keyboard here! (Prophet 2000/ V2018 ect?)
Sampling front end and VCF's and VCA's.
Plenty of front panel knobs for the main performance control.
8 voice/4 part multi is ok here but the more specs the better of course. (Price notwithstanding!)
Sequencer of some descript on board.
Keeping a keen eye for the future!
12/16 mono or 6/8 stereo voices would be a good place to start.
The Prophet 2000 hard-panned its voices to either side, which worked well if you could dedicate a pair of channels with adjustable stereo width, but reduced voice count to four when running stereo samples.
-
I'd say for the DSI Sampler
Name: Sequential Mimic
10 Voice Polyphony
10 Part Multitimbrality
10 Track Sequencer
61 keys w/ aftertouch and velocity.
Samples can be uploaded via USB.
Prophet 6 style VCFs and VCAs.
Samples can be set as one shot, gated, and looped.
On board effects as well.
-
Interesting information DavidDever and LoboLives!
Would it muddy the waters for the "possible" DSI sampler to have an analogue carrier input jack and in the onboard effects section to have a vocoder effector so one of the samples can be used as the modulator for a vocoder effect?
Possible option for any analogue inputs could be to have 2 mic/line inputs which could be used similar to the Korg MicroKorg/R3 ?
The inputs could be switched to other duties if not using that particular effect.
Just a thought!
Tim
-
If I should ever want a multi timbral powerhouse from Dave, I'd opt for something like this:
32 voices (all should be playable in any configuration, from 32 individual to one 32 voice polyphonic preset)
The voice architecture should be a "One Voice to Rule them All!" ... the architecture taken from the Evolver, where you have two analog oscillators (taken from the REV2 to keep cost down), and two digital (taken from the P12). Add the option to include sample oscillators on the two digital oscillators... Keep it mono instead of the Evolvers stereo configuration to further keep cost down (and polyphony up!).
Now D/A convert the digital oscillators, and mix them with the analog ones, and throw them thru a multimode VCF (HP/LP/BP etc.) and into a VCA...
In parallel, put the usual FX section of the REV2/P6/OB6 (this is on all voices of course, not per voice) ... this may need more than one FX engine... probably more like 4 to 8, and all working with sends from all the voices.
Summa Summarum, I'd like to see a "super voice" containing all that Dave has made in analog and digital, with added sampling functionality... the "One Voice to Rule Them All!" ... then this "voice" could go into different instruments... maybe even a multi timbral one that you can put as many "voice boards" into that you want... say, 32 slots, and you can have anything from one to 32 "super voice cards" in it, and use them one by itself, or in groups for polyphony. This would give people a chance at buying them without breaking their wallet.
He could name it "Sawron!" ... or something...
-
I'd say for the DSI Sampler
Name: Sequential Mimic
10 Voice Polyphony
10 Part Multitimbrality
10 Track Sequencer
61 keys w/ aftertouch and velocity.
Samples can be uploaded via USB.
Prophet 6 style VCFs and VCAs.
Samples can be set as one shot, gated, and looped.
On board effects as well.
Samples should be able to be reversed as they play with a button. Forward/backward loop play. Loop in release/free play release. Attack/a-b loop/release. Loop a-b point/loop length modulation.
USB uploading, yes, but also SD card facilities.
As for the name, "Rogue Trooper" after the 2000AD strip by the same name that follows the adventures of a clone soldier. Or maybe "Big Dave, the hardest man in Manchester". I know Dave Smith isn't from Manchester, but it too good a name to not use for anything that needs a name.
Or considering my thoughts on the need to rejuvenate synth naming conventions with inspiration from b-grade 50's and 60's horror and sci-fi films, how about The Doppleganger?
-
I'd say for the DSI Sampler
Name: Sequential Mimic
10 Voice Polyphony
10 Part Multitimbrality
10 Track Sequencer
61 keys w/ aftertouch and velocity.
Samples can be uploaded via USB.
Prophet 6 style VCFs and VCAs.
Samples can be set as one shot, gated, and looped.
On board effects as well.
Samples should be able to be reversed as they play with a button. Forward/backward loop play. Loop in release/free play release. Attack/a-b loop/release. Loop a-b point/loop length modulation.
USB uploading, yes, but also SD card facilities.
As for the name, "Rogue Trooper" after the 2000AD strip by the same name that follows the adventures of a clone soldier. Or maybe "Big Dave, the hardest man in Manchester". I know Dave Smith isn't from Manchester, but it too good a name to not use for anything that needs a name.
Or considering my thoughts on the need to rejuvenate synth naming conventions with inspiration from b-grade 50's and 60's horror and sci-fi films, how about The Doppleganger?
Or “The Thing” since it’s an imitation of other synths. ;)
-
Or considering my thoughts on the need to rejuvenate synth naming conventions with inspiration from b-grade 50's and 60's horror and sci-fi films, how about The Doppleganger?
Yes!!
-
I don't really give a **** what it's going to be called, just make me than darn sampler-synthesizer with VCF and VCA! :P
-
To be honest...I actually don’t have a good feeling for this Namm in regards to DSI...I think with us all asking for a sampler or hybrid or digital VS synth...all we are going to get is a VCO analog mono synth or a four voice lower priced poly to replace the Mophox4.
I just think a lot of people are pumped for this Namm because Korg’s new poly synth, Roger possibly bringing out Linn Drum II, Yamaha possibly making a lower priced version of the Montage but I have a gut feeling it’s all going to be very underwhelming.
-
It seems to me - putting aside the wished for VS-PEK instrument - that the only synthesizer lacking from the DSI line up is that newly-designed VCO analog mono synth you don't want. Otherwise, they've basically covered all the bases in their corner. Personally, it's what I'd most like to see. Would the Pro 2 make it redundant? Not if it was really robust on the analog side, had a deep voice architecture, was full-sized, and was made into a module as well. Then it could surpass the Subsequent 37 and the Matrixbrute. But I'm not holding my breath. I no longer try to anticipate what Dave Smith will do next. This was just idle wishful thinking.
-
I think they still lack a sampling synthesizer in their line-up to be honest... it's not enough with a VS like, they do not have anything sample based as a performance synthesizer at all...
-
It seems to me - putting aside the wished for VS-PEK instrument - that the only synthesizer lacking from the DSI line up is that newly-designed VCO analog mono synth you don't want. Otherwise, they've basically covered all the bases in their corner. Personally, it's what I'd most like to see. Would the Pro 2 make it redundant? Not if it was really robust on the analog side, had a deep voice architecture, was full-sized, and was made into a module as well. Then it could surpass the Subsequent 37 and the Matrixbrute. But I'm not holding my breath. I no longer try to anticipate what Dave Smith will do next. This was just idle wishful thinking.
This used to be what I wanted to see more than anything. Today, I'm mostly convinced that the mono synth market is too crowded, and I'm on Team I'd Like to See a Sampler.
-
It just seems as if Dave does not want a little-bit-of-everything type of company. The whole DSI line is closely related, and I would expect that it's deliberate. Even the Prophet 12 and Prophet 6 bear enough resemblance. Dave's approach/philosophy is the cause, and I would expect to see this continue. But I will not be surprised if that VS-PEK instrument does actually appear.
As for a sampling synthesizer, wouldn't that be a drastic turn?
-
This used to be what I wanted to see more than anything. Today, I'm mostly convinced that the mono synth market is too crowded, and I'm on the "I'd like to see a sampler" bandwagon.
When I go searching for an analog mono synth, the market certainly doesn't seem crowded to me. It seems, rather, to be littered with frustratingly small instruments, from the Subsequent, to the Odyssey, to the MS-20, to the Analog Solutions instruments, to countless similar modules, and so on. This is where the redundancy is, and it is indeed redundancy. Even the Minimoog is on its way out. That leaves the Matrixbrute, which does not appeal to many of us due to its sound, appearance, and that lousy third oscillator. The only thing I like about it is the length of its keyboard.
The exception here is the Vermona '14, which is presently on the top of my mono synth list. An impressive instrument with a superb build quality. If one of my instruments sells, I'll be quite tempted to buy one. But of course, only 222 units are being made.
The rare Vermona aside, what's still lacking in the market is a powerful full-sized analog mono synth - preferably VCO based - with a high-quality keyboard and costing about $2,500. In light of the sound of the Prophet-6 and the capabilities of the Pro 2, DSI could best fill that spot, and I wish they would.
-
It just seems as if Dave does not want a little-bit-of-everything type of company. The whole DSI line is closely related, and I would expect that it's deliberate. Even the Prophet 12 and Prophet 6 bear enough resemblance. Dave's approach/philosophy is the cause, and I would expect to see this continue. But I will not be surprised if that VS-PEK instrument does actually appear.
As for a sampling synthesizer, wouldn't that be a drastic turn?
Depends on how it is implemented I'd say... if you think of a sampler like with the older E-MU Emulator series, then yes... certainly, but exactly what you are mentioning is what I think it could be... something that is a resemblance of things he already have at hand... Dave is using the same tricks as many other bigger companies now; he reuse his code and ideers in new products, enhancing on them... so yes, that is a typical thing of Dave's "evolving instruments" so to speak...
So what I see possible is a growing on something already there... like the P12 for example, but with the added option of using sample oscillators.... I'm not talking about something with a huge multisample-setup engine and loads of voices... that is why I call it a "sampling synthesizer"... most samplers are better for studio use, but what I could see Dave do, is make the sampling synthesizer more suitable for live performance (which seems to be his goal with all his creations lately).
If he created a really good sample oscillator playback routine, that would allow samples to be stretched all over the keyboard without the need for multisamples, just like in the Roland V-Synth machines, the need for multisample setups could also be completely removed...
I can only talk for myself of course, but what I would want of a sampler, is not to recreate realistic acoustic instruments by using multisamples, but rather the advantage of using sampled textures as oscillators, because it does allow for some REALLY FAST creation of huge pads for Ambient music (and other genres), without the need to sit and tweak on normal oscillators for hours on end.... you could simply just choose a sample texture, and start molding that with filters, other sample oscillators ... maybe even with audio rate modulation in the Mod Matrix... I mean... such a way of using samples would be extremely cool for my usage, and I think others would find it useful too.
Put in the V-Synth COSM effect for sideband filters, and you can turn almost ANY sample into a lush PAD sound...
I really hope for such a synth... and if I have not seen anything before I've saved up enough, I'll probably go for a V-Synth GT instead, simply to get a sample synthesizer.... just really would like to see something like that with VCF and VCA :)
-
This used to be what I wanted to see more than anything. Today, I'm mostly convinced that the mono synth market is too crowded, and I'm on the "I'd like to see a sampler" bandwagon.
When I go searching for an analog mono synth, the market certainly doesn't seem crowded to me. It seems, rather, to be littered with frustratingly small instruments, from the Subsequent, to the Odyssey, to the MS-20, to the Analog Solutions instruments, to countless similar modules, and so on. This is where the redundancy is, and it is indeed redundancy. Even the Minimoog is on its way out. That leaves the Matrixbrute, which does not appeal to many of us due to its sound, appearance, and that lousy third oscillator. The only thing I like about it is the length of its keyboard.
The exception here is the Vermona '14, which is presently on the top of my mono synth list. An impressive instrument with a superb build quality. If one of my instruments sells, I'll be quite tempted to buy one. But of course, only 222 units are being made.
The rare Vermona aside, what's still lacking in the market is a powerful full-sized analog mono synth - preferably VCO based - with a high-quality keyboard and costing about $2,500. In light of the sound of the Prophet-6 and the capabilities of the Pro 2, DSI could best fill that spot, and I wish they would.
You can always get the Full size Odyssey.
-
By "small," I didn't mean having smaller keys; I meant a regular-sized three-octave keyboard two-oscillator instrument.
-
I don't usually care about polyphony that much but I just think a basic mono synth really will be a step backwards for DSI. They need to keep evolving not take a major step back and I don't think you are ever going to see a mono synth with more than 3 octaves going forward. So unless you want to settle for the MatrixBrute (Which actually does sound fairly decent to my ears) I would strongly suggest that you may have to get used to an external controller.
I wouldn't mind what I suggested before: the Pro 4.
Basically DSI's interpretation of the Oberheim Four Voice: Four AS-1 Mono synths under one hood. Each has it's own patch memory, own sequence and can be configured in numerous ways (Splits, layers, sequencer only, sequencer transpose, keyboard on/off etc)-however I would personally prefer if Moog did such a synth instead.
-
'Moving forward' and 'going backwards' are vague expressions, but they imply that the goal is innovation, that a great instrument is a ground-breaking one full of thrilling new ideas.
My approach is to want, not something sensationally ground-breaking, but simply something excellent, a musical instrument that excels in providing an abundance of already-familiar fundamental features, the basics of synthesis in large quantities. I don't need something new, new, new. New compositions provide the new, new, new element. I'm perfectly content with synthesis as it exists. I only need more of it in each instrument.
I'm hoping for a mono synth that fits this description, but I'm realistic enough to expect to have to somewhat create it myself.
As for instruments that already exist, the Pro 2 comes the closest. But I'd much rather it have a classic VCO sound, and even be a bit larger in physical size.
-
'Moving forward' and 'going backwards' are vague expressions, but they imply that the goal is innovation, that a great instrument is a ground-breaking one full of thrilling new ideas. My approach is to want, not something sensationally ground-breaking, but simply something excellent, a musical instrument that excels in providing an abundance of already-familiar fundamental features, the basics of synthesis in large quantities. It's very hard to find such instruments.
I'm hoping for a mono synth that fits this description, but I'm realistic enough to expect to have to somewhat create it myself.
Going backwards would be like Moog making the Sub 37 and then making the Model D. So essentially you make a synth that has more features and follow it up with a synth that has none. It would be like Dave following up the REV2 with a mono version...it be counter productive because you can always just stack the REV2 in unison mode anyway. Same with the P6 and OB6. So a whole new synth that is basically just a dedicated "mode" or "feature" on a currently existing one would be pointless.
Moving forwards would be "What's the next step?" I.E. "We got the Sequential name...what else can we do with it?" "We've done bi-timbral...let's figure out a way to add two more engines under that hood without any major menu diving." "The Evolvers are getting popular on the forum...how can we upgrade them? More polyphony? More effects? Possible sampling on one of the digital oscillators?"
You can always go modular. Get a Doepfer A-100 pre assembled system and hook it to one of their 88 key controllers. Actually I tried one myself and I was blown away by the sound. May pick one up eventually.
-
Right; that's what I figured. But there is use in having a full-time dedicated mono synth - maybe not for you, but for some of us. An instrument that is always set aside for melody purposes and appropriately effected is not the same as a Rev2 in mono mode. It's a matter of having an ensemble of instruments, rather than one instrument that does it all. And I'd rather not have to buy a poly synth, only to use it as a mono synth.
-
'Moving forward' and 'going backwards' are vague expressions, but they imply that the goal is innovation, that a great instrument is a ground-breaking one full of thrilling new ideas. My approach is to want, not something sensationally ground-breaking, but simply something excellent, a musical instrument that excels in providing an abundance of already-familiar fundamental features, the basics of synthesis in large quantities. It's very hard to find such instruments.
I'm hoping for a mono synth that fits this description, but I'm realistic enough to expect to have to somewhat create it myself.
Going backwards would be like Moog making the Sub 37 and then making the Model D. So essentially you make a synth that has more features and follow it up with a synth that has none. It would be like Dave following up the REV2 with a mono version...it be counter productive because you can always just stack the REV2 in unison mode anyway. Same with the P6 and OB6. So a whole new synth that is basically just a dedicated "mode" or "feature" on a currently existing one would be pointless.
Moving forwards would be "What's the next step?" I.E. "We got the Sequential name...what else can we do with it?" "We've done bi-timbral...let's figure out a way to add two more engines under that hood without any major menu diving." "The Evolvers are getting popular on the forum...how can we upgrade them? More polyphony? More effects? Possible sampling on one of the digital oscillators?"
You can always go modular. Get a Doepfer A-100 pre assembled system and hook it to one of their 88 key controllers. Actually I tried one myself and I was blown away by the sound. May pick one up eventually.
Creating a one voice version of the REV2 would be a step back for those who has the doe to get a REV2 yes... but for people who cannot afford that, a 1voice REV2 would definitely be a step forward, since the only comparable device for them would be one of the earlier 1-voice versions of the P08... people has a tendency to always see things from their own point of view... what might be a step back for you, might be a step forward for someone else :)
-
That is true I am looking at it from my point of view.
-
Well said, Razmo.
I'm not opposed to any of the instruments proposed - be it a sampling or a hybrid synthesizer. I'm just making the point that a large mono synth such as I've described is not to be found.
-
Besides the VS/PEK/Wavestation and sampler ideas above I would say that a duophonic synthesizer is better than a mono if layers and stereo stack mode are present complete with external inputs. But there are many ideas out there and what to expect next is a well described problem (https://youtu.be/Nf_Y4MbUCLY?t=33s).
The only thing I am curious about is the design direction the new instrument takes. Are we going to see a new entry to the line of more or less reissued instruments? Or will something new happen? I am very happy DSI did P6/OB-6 and it was great to see P08 receiving an upgrade. But how about something new next time?
In any case I can wait until NAMM to see what it ends up being.
-
I think DSI nailed the perfect analog poly synth design in the P6 and OB6. I love having no menu and just having everything on the front panel. I really hope we see a continuation of that myself.
-
I think DSI nailed the perfect analog poly synth design in the P6 and OB6. I love having no menu and just having everything on the front panel. I really hope we see a continuation of that myself.
I agree on that one... it's actually one of the reasons I'm choosing DSI again now... because I do not need an editor on a computer to edit the sounds easily... That is also why a Sampler synth in my piont of view, should not be as complicated as for example the old (but darn good!) E-MU Ultra samplers... if you need to have multisampled stuff and the depth of these, you will surely have menu diving and worse.... that is why I'd like the sampling part to be simple... just add them as oscillators as in the Blofeld, just with a whole lot easier loading/saving of samples, and if possible; realtime timestretching... and if really really good; add formant control like on the V-Synth as well... then we're talking some darn cool sampler synth! :D
-
I think DSI nailed the perfect analog poly synth design in the P6 and OB6. I love having no menu and just having everything on the front panel. I really hope we see a continuation of that myself.
I agree on that one... it's actually one of the reasons I'm choosing DSI again now...
Honestly for a bi-timbral analog synth I would have like to have seen something like two Prophet 6 or OB6 style modules side by side with a Split/Stack button in the middle. That would have been perfect.
if DSI were to ever do another Evolver I really hope we see those patch selection buttons of the P6/OB6 on it as well. Maybe just colored blue.
-
Perhaps guessing what Dave and his team are up to next is a near impossible task. I just looked at the DSI's site about page and Dave did produce a sampler once:
1985 – PROPHET-2000
The Prophet 2000 was a 12-bit sampling keyboard. It featured 512k of sample memory, and selectable sampling rates of 16, 32, and 42kHz. External storage was provided via floppy disk. The Prophet 2000 featured MIDI, 8 voice polyphony, and an arpeggiator. Its analog filters and VCAs gave the Prophet 2000 a warmth that differentiated from other samplers of the period.
Given that DSI is looking at what they find interesting to build (and I do really love that approach). Doing repeat exercises of old products is probably not much fun. Obviously there has to be some commercial element and as writing (good quality) software is a very time consuming process, DSI will probably build further "on top" of their existing software library.
Investigating the new cheap CPU architectures, FPGAs and all that, I can imagine DSI is looking at something completely different that can be build with powerful but very low cost hardware. I just read a very interesting article about Dolby Atmos which describes the incredible quality of REM's "Automatic for the people", completely re-mixed and mastered for a three dimensional sound field. I can imagine there is something fascinating about building a synthesizer that is capable of generating sound that can be positioned in a three dimensional space......
Aaahh we can dream ...
-
Perhaps guessing what Dave and his team are up to next is a near impossible task.
I have seen DSI staff saying that with their current team things are a lot more dynamic than in the early DSI days. So expect the unexpected. I am happy with that. Makes NAMM expectations much more fun!
-
We have all but convinced ourselves that a new Poly Evolver of sorts is coming. Someone here should inform DSI, in case they haven't heard!
I only hope we're right.
-
I only hope we're right.
I have come to a point where I simply wait to see what they will announce at NAMM. I think there is good consensus on what the community want most. But what actually happens is a good question that we will know at NAMM. So I will simply wait and see how the new machine(s) look. Its much easier that way! ;)
-
But there is a good point in debating what MIGHT come, or what we would LIKE to come... because if we did not, DSI would never know... would they? ;)
-
Agree, lets not forget to dream about what would be great to see. Good point indeed.
-
I just read a very interesting article about Dolby Atmos which describes the incredible quality of REM's "Automatic for the people", completely re-mixed and mastered for a three dimensional sound field. I can imagine there is something fascinating about building a synthesizer that is capable of generating sound that can be positioned in a three dimensional space......
Thanks for that info! Automatic for the People just might be my favorite album ever. Atmos seems like it's designed for the cinema, so I'm not sure how I'd hear it at home. But, you know, I'd totally pay twelve bucks to sit in a dark movie theater and listen to Automatic for the People.
-
But there is a good point in debating what MIGHT come, or what we would LIKE to come... because if we did not, DSI would never know... would they? ;)
Ahhh Emulator II style sampler with VCFs and VCAs.
New digital synthesizer with Vector Synthesis.
Paraphonic analog string machine that also doubles as a vocoder and guitar synth with dedicated inputs.
A dual manual double Prophet 6.
Four part multitimbral analog synth.
Stand alone analog sequencer with the ability to ratchet steps, chain sequences into songs and save sequences.
-
I just read a very interesting article about Dolby Atmos which describes the incredible quality of REM's "Automatic for the people", completely re-mixed and mastered for a three dimensional sound field. I can imagine there is something fascinating about building a synthesizer that is capable of generating sound that can be positioned in a three dimensional space......
Thanks for that info! Automatic for the People just might be my favorite album ever. Atmos seems like it's designed for the cinema, so I'm not sure how I'd hear it at home. But, you know, I'd totally pay twelve bucks to sit in a dark movie theater and listen to Automatic for the People.
No, it is not designed just for cinema. Atmos is designed to give sound mixers/masterers and creators more control over placing of instruments / events in a 3D sound field (spatial audio). I understand it introduces the concept of "object oriented" sound tracks. Where embedded with the audio information there is meta data that describes how the sound should be processed and placed in a 3D space. This ensures that audio processors in effect units and amplifiers have exact information where each track/instrument should be placed. Then it solely depends on the sophistication of the speaker setup how well this is translated to real life.
Apparently the modern versions of the XBox console can process Dolby Atmos and do some trickery so you can experience it over (normal) stereo headphones. I looked up the original Ars Technica article: https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/11/spatial-audio-is-the-most-exciting-thing-to-happen-to-pop-music-since-stereo/ (https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/11/spatial-audio-is-the-most-exciting-thing-to-happen-to-pop-music-since-stereo/)
Recently I got hold of a second hand Evolver desktop . It is very interesting how the pairs of oscillators are assigned to each stereo channel and how you can switch from mono to small and wide field stereo imaging. I don't think it should be very difficult, more like a natural progression, for DSI to design an Evolver / P12 kind of synthesizer that uses Atmos technology and together with a compatible processor / amplifier create soundscapes where each oscillator can be positioned in exact locations in a (virtual) 3D room.
Apparently because of the 3D space Dolby Atmos provides, in stead of the "2D" stereo spacing, the mixing of instruments can become easier as you can position them spatially in three dimensions so they are not in each other's way.
Just writing this down gets me excited and very interested about an instrument like this. How about it DSI: next synthesizer with Dolby Atmos capabilities (as well as stereo of course)?
-
But there is a good point in debating what MIGHT come, or what we would LIKE to come... because if we did not, DSI would never know... would they? ;)
Ahhh Emulator II style sampler with VCFs and VCAs.
New digital synthesizer with Vector Synthesis.
Paraphonic analog string machine that also doubles as a vocoder and guitar synth with dedicated inputs.
A dual manual double Prophet 6.
Four part multitimbral analog synth.
Stand alone analog sequencer with the ability to ratchet steps, chain sequences into songs and save sequences.
Lets hope that Santadave believe you have been a good boy this year :D
-
This would be my proposal for something VS-like.
(http://forum.davesmithinstruments.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=125.0;attach=1428;image)
-
This would be my proposal for something VS-like.
Cool mock-up there Paul. I hope DSI licensed it from you. :)
The only thing I would "change" is, instead of a "stereo filter", I would have 2 x SVFs that could be run in series, parallel or stereo... After all, a stereo filter is really two mono filters panned left and right anyway, right?
-
Cool mock-up there Paul. I hope DSI licensed it from you. :)
Haha, thanks!
The only thing I would "change" is, instead of a "stereo filter", I would have 2 x SVFs that could be run in series, parallel or stereo... After all, a stereo filter is really two mono filters panned left and right anyway, right?
I was trying to think in realistic terms of how features have been incorporated and varied in the past, hence no repetition of the Pro 2 filter section for example, but a modulatable filter slope control that could work in steps (1-4 pole modes) or continuously. The thought was to have the signal path organized like in the Evolver, where the Pan Spread (called Output Pan there) controls how far the left and right channels are spread, from a hard-panned signal to a centered signal.
Instead of providing individual stereo outputs per layer, though, I thought that for a vector synth there should be a quad output. That's how the WS was set up. In that case, the stereo operation of the filter would of course have to be overridden.
2 x SVFs in series, parallel or stereo sounds tasty as well, though.
-
This would be my proposal for something VS-like.
Brings a tear to my eye. Would like to have a joy stick on that baby too as well as random patch selection like the OB6/Prophet 6 selection buttons...but in blue!
-
This would be my proposal for something VS-like.
Brings a tear to my eye. Would like to have a joy stick on that baby too as well as random patch selection like the OB6/Prophet 6 selection buttons...but in blue!
I kinda prefer the 2-dimensional touch pad (instead of a joystick)... especially if it is touch sensitive -- I suppose that would make it 3 dimensional.
-
This would be my proposal for something VS-like.
It looks pretty cool. Love the somewhat evolved blues!
-
Brings a tear to my eye. Would like to have a joy stick on that baby too as well as random patch selection like the OB6/Prophet 6 selection buttons...but in blue!
The P-6/OB-6 style buttons were actually in the original draft, but they didn't quite fit the overall aesthetics and would have taken away too much space. Oh, and a joystick was too.
There is a random patch generator button though.
-
I kinda prefer the 2-dimensional touch pad (instead of a joystick)... especially if it is touch sensitive -- I suppose that would make it 3 dimensional.
You are correct in that assumption. It would basically be a pressure sensitive XY pad roughly the size of a ROLI lightpad. Pressure sensitivity because you could simultaneously control modulation amounts while moving around or morphing through the waveforms. For standard vector stick behaviour there would be the latch button.
In stereo mode one could also pan between left and right by moving the finger horizontally or between layered oscillators by moving vertically.
-
This would be my proposal for something VS-like.
Brings a tear to my eye. Would like to have a joy stick on that baby too as well as random patch selection like the OB6/Prophet 6 selection buttons...but in blue!
I kinda prefer the 2-dimensional touch pad (instead of a joystick)... especially if it is touch sensitive -- I suppose that would make it 3 dimensional.
Actually thinking about it now. Take the concept of the touch strip that was on the P12, Pro2 and Tempest and make an entire large pad with "Latch" options. That would be pretty damn cool.
-
I kinda prefer the 2-dimensional touch pad (instead of a joystick)... especially if it is touch sensitive -- I suppose that would make it 3 dimensional.
You are correct in that assumption. It would basically be a pressure sensitive XY pad roughly the size of a ROLI lightpad. Pressure sensitivity because you could simultaneously control modulation amounts while moving around or morphing through the waveforms. For standard vector stick behaviour there would be the latch button.
In stereo mode one could also pan between left and right by moving the finger horizontally or between layered oscillators by moving vertically.
Sort of like Roger Linn's Linnstrument but built in a DSI synth! WOW!
-
Brings a tear to my eye. Would like to have a joy stick on that baby too as well as random patch selection like the OB6/Prophet 6 selection buttons...but in blue!
The P-6/OB-6 style buttons were actually in the original draft, but it didn't quite fit the overall aesthetics and would have taken away too much space. Oh, and a joystick was too.
There is a random patch generator button though.
Yeah it seems like it's much more of a P12 type design...still...I wonder if there could be a way to combine the two designs so that the patch buttons are included. Perhaps take the OLED screen and move it to the side or a corner of the synth (sort of like the screen on the Tempest)
-
It looks pretty cool. Love the somewhat evolved blues!
Haha!
-
I kinda prefer the 2-dimensional touch pad (instead of a joystick)... especially if it is touch sensitive -- I suppose that would make it 3 dimensional.
You are correct in that assumption. It would basically be a pressure sensitive XY pad roughly the size of a ROLI lightpad. Pressure sensitivity because you could simultaneously control modulation amounts while moving around or morphing through the waveforms. For standard vector stick behaviour there would be the latch button.
In stereo mode one could also pan between left and right by moving the finger horizontally or between layered oscillators by moving vertically.
Sort of like Roger Linn's Linnstrument but built in a DSI synth! WOW!
Paul and Lobo... If either of you boys can solder, we can go into business!
Put that 3-dimensional pad in the mod matrix so it can control any 3 parameters (as opposed to always being a 4 waveform mixer).
-
Paul and Lobo... If either of you boys can solder, we can go into business!
Haha! I can solder, but I'm not sure how quick I am at soldering SMD components.
Put that 3-dimensional pad in the mod matrix so it can control any 3 parameters (as opposed to always being a 4 waveform mixer).
That was the idea. To embed it in the mod matrix like the touch stripes of the Pro 2 for example.
-
I better leave this thread. I'd rather not set myself up for disappointment in January.
-
I better leave this thread. I'd rather not set myself up for disappointment in January.
Ha... I was thinking the same thing.
-
Sort of like Roger Linn's Linnstrument but built in a DSI synth! WOW!
As a front panel 3D controller: genius!
As for having a LinnStrument controller instead of a keyboard: far better with USB/MIDI hosting possibility so that any class compliant USB/MIDI device can be connected directly to the synth. Better convenience and lower latency than the standard 3 kb/sec slowspeed MIDI connection. Of cause MPE will have to be supported.
I better leave this thread. I'd rather not set myself up for disappointment in January.
Better suggestion: stay and dream on. Later on: help start a company to realize that dream! ;)
-
Put that 3-dimensional pad in the mod matrix so it can control any 3 parameters (as opposed to always being a 4 waveform mixer).
It can quite likely already be done on existing synths using a 3D controller such as KMI QuNeo and possibly a little mapping software between controller and synth. Voice would then have to handle the received controllers values. Of cause that feature is limited to what the voice can express.
-
Actually thinking about it now. Take the concept of the touch strip that was on the P12, Pro2 and Tempest and make an entire large pad with "Latch" options. That would be pretty damn cool.
Do you mean like this?
-
I kinda prefer the 2-dimensional touch pad (instead of a joystick)... especially if it is touch sensitive -- I suppose that would make it 3 dimensional.
You are correct in that assumption. It would basically be a pressure sensitive XY pad roughly the size of a ROLI lightpad. Pressure sensitivity because you could simultaneously control modulation amounts while moving around or morphing through the waveforms. For standard vector stick behaviour there would be the latch button.
In stereo mode one could also pan between left and right by moving the finger horizontally or between layered oscillators by moving vertically.
Sort of like Roger Linn's Linnstrument but built in a DSI synth! WOW!
Paul and Lobo... If either of you boys can solder, we can go into business!
Put that 3-dimensional pad in the mod matrix so it can control any 3 parameters (as opposed to always being a 4 waveform mixer).
Deja Vu a different forum 2001.....
-
Just had someone on the GS forum remark that 2018 would be the 40th anniversary of the Prophet 5. Is that true?
-
Just had someone on the GS forum remark that 2018 would be the 40th anniversary of the Prophet 5. Is that true?
Work on the Prophet-5 started in April 1977 and the first and only prototype was presented at the NAMM show in January 1978. So yes, at the time of next Winter NAMM it'll be 40 years since the public first met the Prophet-5.
Don't forget that the Prophet-6 was already a reimagined Prophet-5, though, so I wouldn't expect anything that's closer to the Prophet-5 than the Prophet-6 already is.
Dave also mentioned at the last Moogfest that although the instrument they're currently working on carries the working title "Prophet something" (I guess the additional description would reveal what it's about), they're ideally shooting for a different name once it's ready to be announced.
So given these two points, I don't think that the 40th anniversary of the Prophet-5 is anything to go by. We'd rather see a successor to the Prophet 12 or something else.
-
Just had someone on the GS forum remark that 2018 would be the 40th anniversary of the Prophet 5. Is that true?
Work on the Prophet-5 started in April 1977 and the first and only prototype was presented at the NAMM show in January 1978. So yes, at the time of next Winter NAMM it'll be 40 years since the public first met the Prophet-5.
Don't forget that the Prophet-6 was already a reimagined Prophet-5, though, so I wouldn't expect anything that's closer to the Prophet-5 than the Prophet-6 already is.
Dave also mentioned at the last Moogfest that although the instrument they're currently working on carries the working title "Prophet something" (I guess the additional description would reveal what it's about), they're ideally shooting for a different name once it's ready to be announced.
So given these two points, I don't think that the 40th anniversary of the Prophet-5 is anything to go by. We'd rather see a successor to the Prophet 12 or something else.
I'm still hoping for the Sequential Waves ;)
While a dual Prophet 6 would be cool I'd like to get those VS waves back
-
So with DSI not being present at NAMM, what do you guys think the odds are that they will still announce a new product at about the same time? I mean, even though they won’t be at NAMM, they still need to be competitive... thoughts?
-
So with DSI not being present at NAMM, what do you guys think the odds are that they will still announce a new product at about the same time? I mean, even though they won’t be at NAMM, they still need to be competitive... thoughts?
I'll put the odds at 5 to 2. They release at least one product a year (with the exception of 2003, which was right after the Evolver came out), and the Prophet 6 and OB6 were both announced in January. Since the Rev2 didn't involve a wholly new architecture, and the OB6 didn't involve a wholly new architecture, the clock for a wholly new architecture stands at three years (with the Prophet 6 in January 2015). I think something new is probably imminent.
-
So with DSI not being present at NAMM, what do you guys think the odds are that they will still announce a new product at about the same time? I mean, even though they won’t be at NAMM, they still need to be competitive... thoughts?
My initial thought was that they might simply announce a new product later this year (spring, summer, or fall). So as of now I don't expect a new synth to be announced in roughly three weeks. The final version of the Tempest, the Mopho x4, and most of the desktop versions of their synths haven't been announced in time for NAMM either, so this would not be an entirely new phenomenon. Either way, we'll know more in three weeks, i.e. whether DSI just skip the upcoming NAMM show because they don't think NAMM is necessary for an announcement or because they are simply not ready yet.
Since the Rev2 didn't involve a wholly new architecture, and the OB6 didn't involve a wholly new architecture, the clock for a wholly new architecture stands at three years (with the Prophet 6 in January 2015). I think something new is probably imminent.
That's what I think too. And given that every synth since the announcement of the Prophet-6 happened to be analog, I rather expect a hybrid design this time around. Whether it'll be a follow-up to the Prophet 12 or an instrument that is meant to co-exist with the Prophet 12 remains to be seen. But that's roughly the direction I would assume.
-
During an interview with Pioneer Dave said that while other synth technology like FM and stuff is neat it’s too complicated compared to analog.
I think that the only things left for DSI to do in the analog realm is multitimbrality. From my understanding Dave isn’t interested in that and to be honest....it would be redundant to the rest of their catalog doing yet another analog poly synth. Nah, time to brings those VS waves back and finally add some sampling to the DSI catalog. DSI have done enough in the analog realm.
-
During an interview with Pioneer Dave said that while other synth technology like FM and stuff is neat it’s too complicated compared to analog.
I think that the only things left for DSI to do in the analog realm is multitimbrality. From my understanding Dave isn’t interested in that and to be honest....it would be redundant to the rest of their catalog doing yet another analog poly synth. Nah, time to brings those VS waves back and finally add some sampling to the DSI catalog. DSI have done enough in the analog realm.
That is certainly the logical next step... and I am saving a spot in my synth cabinet for just such a creature... :)
-
During an interview with Pioneer Dave said that while other synth technology like FM and stuff is neat it’s too complicated compared to analog.
Well, classic FM synthesis à la DX7 is not that complicated and one doesn't have to mythologize it. The biggest problem FM has are the sounds that are being associated with it and the fact that they're perceived as horribly dated and cheesy, which makes it more of a marketing problem. The latter is of course the same case for classic analog sounds, but for some reason the majority of synth users think that those aged more gracefully.
-
I think that the only things left for DSI to do in the analog realm is multitimbrality.
Oh there are plenty of other options in analog synthesizer design for the type of voices DSI does. For instance would an instrument featuring the new discrete oscillators and filters combined with plenty of modulation features be something the current line of instruments does not offer.
Nah, time to brings those VS waves back and finally add some sampling to the DSI catalog. DSI have done enough in the analog realm.
There are plenty of options in hybrid voice design including a new VS, a sampler with analog filters and something inspired by the Evolver featuring both analog and digital oscillators. Not to mention that a little phase modulation would be lovely. Not to mention a new drum machine inspired by the earlier BookChik and LinnDrumm II design ideas.
I am curious about the direction they take on the voice architecture front this time around. Given that competition starts to hit the analog polysynth market for real their best move may be to make a new voice that really sets them apart from the rest of the competition. So I would not be terribly surprised if we do not see a new instrument until NAMM 2019.
-
Hybrids aside, I'm confident DSI will continue to produce analog synthesizers. It's what they do, it's more or less all they do, and it's going to remain the case. Of course, that allows room for little surprises. Perhaps one of these days they'll get around to offering digital effects units. But as far as synthesizers go, I think it's obvious what the DSI future holds.
What DSI has not yet done is produce an immense all-analog polyphonic synthesizer. That's just one future possibility, and it's still my primary hope. I mean the sort of instrument that could persuade some of us to sell all or most of our other instruments.
-
Actually I was wrong about the Tempest not being announced at a NAMM show. In fact, it was always announced at Winter NAMM shows in all of its three different incarnations.
To the best of my knowledge, this is an overview over the DSI release history since 2002:
Spring 2002: Announcement of the Evolver; October 29: shipping announcement; first presented at Winter NAMM 2003
December 6, 2003: Announcement of the Poly Evolver Rack, first presented at Winter NAMM 2004; May 10, 2004: shipping announcement
December 23/24, 2004: Announcement of the Poly Evolver Keyboard, first presented at Winter NAMM 2005; May 10, 2005: shipping announcement
January 11, 2006: Announcement of the Mono Evolver Keyboard, first presented at Winter NAMM 2006; May 1: shipping announcement
NAMM 2007: First announcement of what would become the Tempest, here under the name BoomChik
August 20, 2007: Announcement of the Prophet ’08 and the Prophet ’08 Special Edition
August 31, 2007: Shipping announcement for the Prophet ’08 Special Edition (300 limited units)
September 10, 2007: Announcement that Prophet ’08s are shipping in greater numbers
Winter NAMM 2008: Showing prototypes of the LinnDrum II Analog (formerly known as BoomChick; 2nd step in the Tempest development) and the Prophet ’08 Module
March 18, 2008: Shipping announcement for the Prophet ’08 Module
May 16, 2008: Announcement of DSI expression pedals, immediate availability
June 1, 2008: Poly Evolver Rack discontinued
September 24, 2008: Announcement of the Mopho, immediate shipping
May 20, 2009: Announcement of the Prophet ’08 Potentiometer Edition
June 2, 2009: Availability of PE conversion kits for the Prophet ’08 announced
August 5, 2009: Announcement of the Tetra, immediate shipping
November 5, 2009: Announcement of the Poly Evolver Keyboard Potentiometer Edition
Winter NAMM 2010: Showing prototypes of the Mopho Keyboard
March 15, 2010: Announcement of the Mopho Keyboard and the return of the Poly Evolver Rack
May 5, 2010: Shipping announcement for the Mopho Keyboard
October 1, 2010: Announcement of the Mono Evolver Keyboard Potentiometer Edition
December 2, 2010: Poly Evolver Rack discontinued
Winter NAMM 2011: Announcement of the Tempest
September 6, 2011: Shipping announcement for the Tempest
August 1, 2012: Announcement of the Mopho x4
Fall 2012: Mono Evolver Keyboard PE and DSI expression pedals discontinued
January 24, 2013/Winter NAMM 2013: Announcement of the Prophet 12; June 25: shipping announcement
October 15, 2013: Announcement of the Mopho SE, shipping later that month
December 18, 2013: Announcement of the Prophet 12 Module, first presented at Winter NAMM 2014
Spring 2014: Poly Evolver Keyboard PE discontinued
June 19, 2014: Announcement of the Pro 2, first presented at Summer NAMM 2014
August 11, 2014: Announcement of the DSM01 Curtis Filter Module, immediate shipping
August 12, 2014: Shipping announcement for the Pro 2
January 12, 2015: Announcement of the DSM02 Character Module, immediate shipping
January 22, 2015/Winter NAMM 2015: announcement of the Prophet-6; May 29: shipping announcement
October 14, 2015: Mopho, Mopho Keyboard, Mopho Keyboard SE, Tetra, and Evolver discontinued
October 22, 2015: Announcement of the Prophet-6 Module; November 25: shipping announcement
January 21, 2016/Winter NAMM 2016: Announcement of the OB-6; March 3: shipping announcement
April 10, 2016: Announcement of the TORAIZ SP-16
June 23, 2016: Announcement of the OB-6 Module; September 9: shipping announcement
October 13, 2016: Announcement of the DSM03 Feedback Module, immediate shipping
January 19, 2017/Winter NAMM 2017: Announcement of the Prophet Rev2 and the TORAIZ AS-1
May 18, 2017: Shipping announcement for the Prophet Rev2
August 29, 2017: Announcement of the Prophet Rev2 Module; October 25: shipping announcement
Strictly speaking, only the following instruments have been announced or presented for the very first time at NAMM shows: BoomChick, LinnDrum II Analog, Prophet ’08 Module, Mopho Keyboard, Tempest, Prophet 12, Prophet-6, OB-6, Prophet Rev2, and TORAIZ AS-1. That's clearly the minority of all the products DSI have released over the years. So there's no reason for panic if there won't be an announcement in about three weeks from now, as this has rather been the exception to the rule.
-
I also wonder if we will continue to see any more collaborations from DSI and Pioneer. A few people at the local music store here said they think Pioneer has backtracked on the production side of things as the SP-16 and AS-1 haven't sold well. Surprising really, both are fantastic.
-
What DSI has not yet done is produce an immense all-analog polyphonic synthesizer. That's just one future possibility, and it's still my primary hope. I mean the sort of instrument that could persuade some of us to sell all or most of our other instruments.
The exact reason why you won't see one is because of your last point. A 20 Voice, VCO based, Multitimbral analog polysynth would make their other products redundant...nah...best to have a bit more variety but I'm not sure what else they can do in the analog realm really that wouldn't be redundant to their other products.
-
I also wonder if we will continue to see any more collaborations from DSI and Pioneer. A few people at the local music store here said they think Pioneer has backtracked on the production side of things as the SP-16 and AS-1 haven't sold well. Surprising really, both are fantastic.
This is just by hearsay though. But as Pioneer is targeting its products to the DJ market, I can't see that much room for further collaborations, certainly not in the standard synthesizer format (keyboard or desktop module), which is what DSI mainly do.
A 20 Voice, VCO based, Multitimbral analog polysynth would make their other products redundant...
Unnecessary overlaps aside, your example would also end up being incredibly expensive.
I'm not sure what else they can do in the analog realm really that wouldn't be redundant to their other products.
With the Rev2, the Prophet-6, the OB-6, and the Mopho x4 that field seems indeed very well covered by now. That's why I would rather assume that a hybrid voice architecture of whatever kind seems more likely for the next step. That could entail a successor to the Prophet 12, a return to some of the Evolver principles (e.g. hybrid front end) in an updated format, or something entirely different.
-
Entirely different.... like in "Sampling Synthesizer"... in my opinion, this would be the most wise logical step right now because, the market is ready for one, and if DSI comes with one soon to compete with the Quantum, they may take the lead on this.... or maybe it's just my wishful thinking :)
I'm having a hard time believing it will be a better version of the P12, as it is still rather new with nothing much to compete with it except for maybe the PEAK and coming Quantum.
besides this, the only synthesis types DSI has not covered is physical modelling, but that technology seems to be put to the grave, as no one makes this synthesis type anymore really...
Actually... if DSI wanted to do an upgrade worthy machine these days, I find that the Tempest would be a much better option... that machine is in my opinion only "half cooked", and could need some dire improvements, and much less obscure interface...
Maybe an all analog drummachine, in the Sequential name, with hands on usage?
-
What DSI has not yet done is produce an immense all-analog polyphonic synthesizer. That's just one future possibility, and it's still my primary hope. I mean the sort of instrument that could persuade some of us to sell all or most of our other instruments.
The exact reason why you won't see one is because of your last point. A 20 Voice, VCO based, Multitimbral analog polysynth would make their other products redundant...nah...best to have a bit more variety but I'm not sure what else they can do in the analog realm really that wouldn't be redundant to their other products.
That's not at all the instrument I had in mind. Twenty voices of VCO's? The price would equal a down payment for a small house! I'd be happy with twelve voices, bi-timbrality, and even DCO's. But I'd love to have a synthesizer with five or six oscillators. I'm trying to keep four as the bare minimum for all my instruments.
-
8 voice poly synth with 3 osc's per voice. Two Osc's being user samples of anything from a single cycle to full pop song length sample in whatever sampling and bit rate, plus an analogue osc with the regular waveforms available with also pwm.
After that, whatever is fine as long as if there is a filter involved, it's multimode and per voice (which I'm sure is a reasonable request)...hey there's an idea, different filter modes for each voice.
-
Entirely different.... like in "Sampling Synthesizer"... in my opinion, this would be the most wise logical step right now because, the market is ready for one, and if DSI comes with one soon to compete with the Quantum, they may take the lead on this.... or maybe it's just my wishful thinking :)
I'm having a hard time believing it will be a better version of the P12, as it is still rather new with nothing much to compete with it except for maybe the PEAK and coming Quantum.
besides this, the only synthesis types DSI has not covered is physical modelling, but that technology seems to be put to the grave, as no one makes this synthesis type anymore really...
Actually... if DSI wanted to do an upgrade worthy machine these days, I find that the Tempest would be a much better option... that machine is in my opinion only "half cooked", and could need some dire improvements, and much less obscure interface...
Maybe an all analog drummachine, in the Sequential name, with hands on usage?
Shame not many do physical modelling anymore. I love the sounds it can get.
As far as a DSI drum machine...I think believe it or not, the Pioneer SP-16 is pretty much the upgrade of the Tempest. Not so much on the actual analog synthesis of course but it does have a lot of the same features, plus a P6 VCF, sampling, multi channel midi out. It also has some nice onboard drum sounds. Not sure if they feature the LM1 or Linn Drum samples but you can sample them into the machine as well as anything else. With the new firmware upgrade, I’m actually considering it as my main sequencer/controller.
-
As far as a DSI drum machine...I think believe it or not, the Pioneer SP-16 is pretty much the upgrade of the Tempest. Not so much on the actual analog synthesis of course but it does have a lot of the same features, plus a P6 VCF, sampling, multi channel midi out. It also has some nice onboard drum sounds. Not sure if they feature the LM1 or Linn Drum samples but you can sample them into the machine as well as anything else. With the new firmware upgrade, I’m actually considering it as my main sequencer/controller.
[/quote]
I've been having a look on the SP16/Pioneer website recently and the latest firmware mentions that the sample time has increased to 64 seconds and DSI P6 filters are now recorded per scene which are nice updates.
There are a few changes and improvements in addition to the above which makes it more appealing for my setup.
Tempest among my other gear is slaved to Engine in my setup and think the Pioneer Sp16 might be a bit of duplication of sequencing duties so hence the wait for the possibility of the DSI Sampler.
As I use the Engine midi/cv gate sequencer already, I just want to hang in a bit longer to see if DSI do an 8 voice keyboard/module sampler with VCF/VCA's per voice otherwise the SP16 looks like a possible sampling solution to retire the Korg Microsampler.
-
8 voice poly synth with 3 osc's per voice. Two Osc's being user samples of anything from a single cycle to full pop song length sample in whatever sampling and bit rate, plus an analogue osc with the regular waveforms available with also pwm.
After that, whatever is fine as long as if there is a filter involved, it's multimode and per voice (which I'm sure is a reasonable request)...hey there's an idea, different filter modes for each voice.
That's a great idea!
The filter setup similar, if not the same as the Pro 2 with both SEM and P6 filters with a sampling front end.
-
What DSI has not yet done is produce an immense all-analog polyphonic synthesizer. That's just one future possibility, and it's still my primary hope. I mean the sort of instrument that could persuade some of us to sell all or most of our other instruments.
The exact reason why you won't see one is because of your last point. A 20 Voice, VCO based, Multitimbral analog polysynth would make their other products redundant...nah...best to have a bit more variety but I'm not sure what else they can do in the analog realm really that wouldn't be redundant to their other products.
That's not at all the instrument I had in mind. Twenty voices of VCO's? The price would equal a down payment for a small house! I'd be happy with twelve voices, bi-timbrality, and even DCO's. But I'd love to have a synthesizer with five or six oscillators. I'm trying to keep four as the bare minimum for all my instruments.
Would that simply just be the REV2 then with less voices?
-
I'd love to see both Dave's collaborate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkXqdpy5uSk
You can dial in the amount of aliasing which is what we were talking about before Sacred Synthesis.
Raz gets his sampler.
It seems unbelievable to have a voltage controlled sampler instead of midi sampler...but here it is. Now if Dave could talk to Dave I'm sure they could come up with the Sequential Imitator or the Sequential Doppelganger sampler synth.
-
I'd love to see both Dave's collaborate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkXqdpy5uSk
You can dial in the amount of aliasing which is what we were talking about before Sacred Synthesis.
Raz gets his sampler.
It seems unbelievable to have a voltage controlled sampler instead of midi sampler...but here it is. Now if Dave could talk to Dave I'm sure they could come up with the Sequential Imitator or the Sequential Doppelganger sampler synth.
I actually shifted a bit in what I would want, if I am to get anything else... I have settled with my V-Synth as my only instrument at all, thinking ONLY about getting maybe ONE more synth in the future, that will be connected to my V-Synths MIDI output (I am not connected to a computer anymore via MIDI) ... that one synth would have to be a desktop synth, and it's synthesis absolutely unique... a simple sampler thru analog filters will not cut it for me anymore, since analog filters is not of any importance to me anymore really... sure would be nice to have as an extra, but the synthesis features would be alfa omega, and any such sampler would have to be REALLY something, to add anything essential to what my V-Synth already provides :)
In fact, I see only ONE such synth at the moment, giving me a lot af extra features... the Waldorf Quantum... Wavetables, Resonator and the added analog filters would be a welcome addition, if they ever make that one in a desktop format, or DSI come up with something synthesis wise that is equivalent...
I read somewhere, that some retailer had listed the Quantum as "Quantum Keyboard", which might suggest it will be made in a desktop version as well... probably without all the hands-on knobs, controlling all or most from within the touch display... if that ever hit the market, I'll be on it in a split second as my last synth...
-
I'd love to see both Dave's collaborate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkXqdpy5uSk
You can dial in the amount of aliasing which is what we were talking about before Sacred Synthesis.
Raz gets his sampler.
It seems unbelievable to have a voltage controlled sampler instead of midi sampler...but here it is. Now if Dave could talk to Dave I'm sure they could come up with the Sequential Imitator or the Sequential Doppelganger sampler synth.
I actually shifted a bit in what I would want, if I am to get anything else... I have settled with my V-Synth as my only instrument at all, thinking ONLY about getting maybe ONE more synth in the future, that will be connected to my V-Synths MIDI output (I am not connected to a computer anymore via MIDI) ... that one synth would have to be a desktop synth, and it's synthesis absolutely unique... a simple sampler thru analog filters will not cut it for me anymore, since analog filters is not of any importance to me anymore really... sure would be nice to have as an extra, but the synthesis features would be alfa omega, and any such sampler would have to be REALLY something, to add anything essential to what my V-Synth already provides :)
In fact, I see only ONE such synth at the moment, giving me a lot af extra features... the Waldorf Quantum... Wavetables, Resonator and the added analog filters would be a welcome addition, if they ever make that one in a desktop format, or DSI come up with something synthesis wise that is equivalent...
I read somewhere, that some retailer had listed the Quantum as "Quantum Keyboard", which might suggest it will be made in a desktop version as well... probably without all the hands-on knobs, controlling all or most from within the touch display... if that ever hit the market, I'll be on it in a split second as my last synth...
Darn.
Well in either case the Assimil8r looks incredible and would love to see a collaboration with DSI.
-
The silence is deafening over here....
(https://www.petmountain.com/photos/product/giant/114420S521013/-/1-2-oz-60-crickets-per-can-.jpg)
-
(https://media.giphy.com/media/QeqQnozVQaehq/giphy.gif)
-
(https://media.giphy.com/media/QeqQnozVQaehq/giphy.gif)
I hope it is at least premium tequila...
-
Maybe there is room for a hybrid design based on the above presented concepts!?
:o . o O ( bugquila )
-
The silence is deafening over here....
(https://www.petmountain.com/photos/product/giant/114420S521013/-/1-2-oz-60-crickets-per-can-.jpg)
I've been thinking the same thing. Not a word, not a hint, not a clue, not even an approximate date.
-
Maybe they take their time? Maybe its a larger and more complex design?
-
I think it's a good thing if they just follow their own schedule as opposed to teasing months in advance with no tangible outcome yet. The past years have been busy, so if they go for something different, it's only natural that it takes some more time. It's not like there have been years in which nothing happened.
-
Not trying to sound unappreciative or impatient — because I am greatly thankful that we have DSI in the market place. Compare their releases over the past few years to those of other synth manufacturers, even the big guys (Roland, Korg, Yamaha). No one has released the same breadth and depth of synthesizers as DSI. No one. Not even close.
That being said, I have an empty slot in my synth cabinet that I highly suspect will be filled by Dave’s next masterpiece. I’m just curious what that will be.
-
Nah, I didn't mean to imply that you sounded unappreciative. And you're right. Compared to other major players, DSI released far more flagship type of synths over the past couple of years (basically nonstop since the Prophet 12) than anybody else.
This time it's maybe a special situation because they didn't appear at NAMM and no-one even has the slightest idea what the next move could be. There are the usual wishes and requests, but anything else appears to be more unpredictable than ever.
-
:-X . o O ( ... (https://youtu.be/Nf_Y4MbUCLY?t=33s) )
-
I think that I am going to hold off on getting anything else after my Two Voice....well maybe a REV2, until I see what Dave and the gang are up to...I’m tempted to get a Poly Evolver or even Nord Wave but then I run the risk of Dave coming out with a brand new Hybrid or digital synth.
As far as analog goes...I’m not sure they would wait this long for a simply mono...I have no idea what else they can come up with at this point...well multitimbrality but I don’t know if they would.
-
I think the word is "anticipation". We're all excited and impatient to know what the big secret is, in the hope that the long wait will be worthwhile. But please toss us a crumb or two to get us through.
-
We have already discussed this in the thread here, but after my experience yesterday evening I still would like to add my own two cents, sorry if I repeat stuff :)
Last night I got really deep into mangling single cycle (600 samples at 44.1 kHz mono WAV format) wave forms on my Akai S5000. On the Akai it is possible to assign multiple sample WAVs to a program by grouping them together in keygroups. You can have 4 in total in one program. Each of those keygroups can have their own LFOs, filters, amp/filter envelopes and so on. It was kind of amazing how it allowed me, with two simple single cycle samples, to create an amazingly complex sound.
I would love to see this kind of functionality appear someplace in a DSI instrument. What the Akai is capable of, despite being a system designed in the previous century, I find amazing given the processor technology from that time period.
Sooner or later of course the S5000 will break down. Anyway I am interested in looking for something that can replace it, surpass it even. I don't even know if there are other manufacturers out there that produce similar functional hardware products. I am not interested in computer sampling - I am interested in an artistic / high tech instrument with it's own characteristics and quirks ;)
-
Something similar to this....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnwQUGTJ6iM
-
Something similar to this....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnwQUGTJ6iM
Not sure, the S5000 has 64 notes polyphony (128 notes with added expansion), 8 outputs (4 stereo pairs, double that with added expansion), 2 LFOs per keygroup (you can have 4 keygroups per program and up to 64 programs in a multi ...), practically unlimited storage (good old SCSI/IDE disks or SCSI/IDE compact flash), 128MBytes of memory but can play samples directly from disk and so on.
But it is the sound sculpting, assigning multiple samples across the keyboard (assigned to MIDI notes) and combining of samples etc. that makes it interesting.
Bells and café noises from Akai: https://soundcloud.com/user-252754541/a-sign-of-a-limited-self-direct-recording-take1#t=0:15
-
The question is of course: will DSI want to, are they able to, produce a sampling product with Akai S5000 kind of capabilities?
-
Something similar to this....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnwQUGTJ6iM
Not sure, the S5000 has 64 notes polyphony (128 notes with added expansion), 8 outputs (4 stereo pairs, double that with added expansion), 2 LFOs per keygroup (you can have 4 keygroups per program and up to 64 programs in a multi ...), practically unlimited storage (good old SCSI/IDE disks or SCSI/IDE compact flash), 128MBytes of memory but can play samples directly from disk and so on.
But it is the sound sculpting, assigning multiple samples across the keyboard (assigned to MIDI notes) and combining of samples etc. that makes it interesting.
Bells and café noises from Akai: https://soundcloud.com/user-252754541/a-sign-of-a-limited-self-direct-recording-take1#t=0:15
I was more speaking of the fact of uploading samples and then running them through an analog synthesis engine. Although the Nord isn't analog it's unique in a sense where it's essentially not only a modern sampler but you can use those samples as waveforms and morph them and blend them together to create new tones.
-
I was more speaking of the fact of uploading samples and then running them through an analog synthesis engine. Although the Nord isn't analog it's unique in a sense where it's essentially not only a modern sampler but you can use those samples as waveforms and morph them and blend them together to create new tones.
What do you mean by "sample morphing"? I'm not sure the Nord Wave does what you think it does....
-
I was more speaking of the fact of uploading samples and then running them through an analog synthesis engine. Although the Nord isn't analog it's unique in a sense where it's essentially not only a modern sampler but you can use those samples as waveforms and morph them and blend them together to create new tones.
What do you mean by "sample morphing"? I'm not sure the Nord Wave does what you think it does....
It allows you to sample your own sounds into the keyboard as waveforms and run them through the synthesis engine instead of playing static samples.
-
I was more speaking of the fact of uploading samples and then running them through an analog synthesis engine. Although the Nord isn't analog it's unique in a sense where it's essentially not only a modern sampler but you can use those samples as waveforms and morph them and blend them together to create new tones.
What do you mean by "sample morphing"? I'm not sure the Nord Wave does what you think it does....
It allows you to sample your own sounds into the keyboard as waveforms and run them through the synthesis engine instead of playing static samples.
Right. I thought you meant that it allowed you to “wave morph” between two samples which, unless I remember incorrectly, it doesn’t allow you to do.
The Nord Lead 3 is still among my favorite sounding VA synths. And I love the architecture. I should have kept mine....
-
I was more speaking of the fact of uploading samples and then running them through an analog synthesis engine. Although the Nord isn't analog it's unique in a sense where it's essentially not only a modern sampler but you can use those samples as waveforms and morph them and blend them together to create new tones.
What do you mean by "sample morphing"? I'm not sure the Nord Wave does what you think it does....
It allows you to sample your own sounds into the keyboard as waveforms and run them through the synthesis engine instead of playing static samples.
Right. I thought you meant that it allowed you to “wave morph” between two samples which, unless I remember incorrectly, it doesn’t allow you to do.
The Nord Lead 3 is still among my favorite sounding VA synths. And I love the architecture. I should have kept mine....
I really do like Nord Synths...shame they are so focused on stage pianos/organs. I think they could be killing it in the digital synth department. Stuff like the Wave and G2 are so unique. Shame the Lead stuff is so expensive...especially since it's VA. Hard for me to justify it.
-
...mangling single cycle (600 samples at 44.1 kHz mono WAV format) wave forms on my Akai S5000. On the Akai it is possible to...
I think there is a perception that because modern computers are so much more powerful than the 80s/90s, that modern samplers are just as good. But IMO a lot of the architecture of those old Akais, Emus and Ensoniqs hasn't really been repeated in software, and certainly not with the kind of poly aftertouch that made things like the EPS16+ such an expressive instrument.
I would love to see Dave pull something together like those, and maybe blend it with an Evolver or VS.
-
I really do like Nord Synths...shame they are so focused on stage pianos/organs. I think they could be killing it in the digital synth department. Stuff like the Wave and G2 are so unique. Shame the Lead stuff is so expensive...especially since it's VA. Hard for me to justify it.
If you’re talking the Nord Lead 4 or A1, yeah, over-priced. But you can pick up a Wave or Nord Lead 3 at a decent price. I actually prefer the NL3 over the NL4 anyway.
-
...mangling single cycle (600 samples at 44.1 kHz mono WAV format) wave forms on my Akai S5000. On the Akai it is possible to...
I think there is a perception that because modern computers are so much more powerful than the 80s/90s, that modern samplers are just as good. But IMO a lot of the architecture of those old Akais, Emus and Ensoniqs hasn't really been repeated in software, and certainly not with the kind of poly aftertouch that made things like the EPS16+ such an expressive instrument.
I would love to see Dave pull something together like those, and maybe blend it with an Evolver or VS.
Agree 100%
-
...mangling single cycle (600 samples at 44.1 kHz mono WAV format) wave forms on my Akai S5000. On the Akai it is possible to...
I think there is a perception that because modern computers are so much more powerful than the 80s/90s, that modern samplers are just as good. But IMO a lot of the architecture of those old Akais, Emus and Ensoniqs hasn't really been repeated in software, and certainly not with the kind of poly aftertouch that made things like the EPS16+ such an expressive instrument.
I would love to see Dave pull something together like those, and maybe blend it with an Evolver or VS.
Totally agree, especially if you also consider the workflow.
-
I too would be intrigued by a DSI sampler. Can someone expand upon what was compelling about those old early samplers? I have no experience with them.
-
My notions would be:
- Lo-fi sound
- analog filters
- synthesis programming
- immediate all-in-one sampling workflow
-
What I would enjoy:
A sampler with instant or peri-instant control of
- sample start
- sample end. Can be as short as a wave cycle.
- loop on/off. Repeat #
- Reverse. Perhaps applicable to selected portions
- Ability to quickly append a few samples into a composite "wave". With flexible selection of component wave sections. (Attack of one, sustain of other). With cross-fade controls. (Maybe 16-32 total "slots".)
I.e., an instrument dedicated to sampling. Via analog filters. Terrific knob-button laden UI.
With characteristically thoughtful DSI-style programming features. Like found on Rev2 or P12.
- parameter sequencer
- performance sequencer
- Delay play
- And LFO's
Always fun!
---
RAM vs flash rom workflow/costs. Enough (but not too much) of both. This is one of the tough spots about this endeavor. Memory size & kind is a fundamental cost question. What are sweet spots for RAM (for editing) and Flash Rom for quick-access playback. This is the topic that will garner such complaints from the clueless- making useless comparisons to computer based systems. I admire makers who have the stomach for that vitriol.
--
The other tough thing:
-- DSP/coding that's responsive for that level of complexity
-- screen. Which way is enough for flow, and not too much. I would think a simple LCD/OLED style screen will suffice. It can't have it all and match price point, development, and workflow needs for a wide enough market.
It's so much easier to write a forum post. My hats off to successful designers who succeed off their designs!!!
---
Personal Requirement:
Key onset-to-sound latency has to be less than 1/3 ms.
-
I too would be intrigued by a DSI sampler. Can someone expand upon what was compelling about those old early samplers? I have no experience with them.
-
My notions would be:
- Lo-fi sound
- analog filters
- synthesis programming
- immediate all-in-one sampling workflow
The compelling aspect would be mostly the latter for those who prefer to process their samples with dedicated hardware instead of computers, although you'd mostly end up with a computer in a different chassis in the end plus dedicated controllers and maybe analog components like filters and VCAs. The latter two ingredients and workflow would basically be the only aspects that could legitimate such an endeavour.
No matter how you go about it, a hardware sampler in 2018 would have to live up to the expectations and the possibilities of according software solutions. So what you wrote in your follow-up post and granular synthesis options would have to be the minimum requirements—that, and probably live looping options like on Elektron's Octatrack. And a huge display for easy visualized sample manipulation in real time, like the GR-1 by Tasty Chips provides for example.
-
I'd actually like to see a small 8 track on board sequencer as well if they are going to go the sampling route.
-
Nice. I would enjoy an 8-track sequencer on any DSI keyboard.
-
I too would be intrigued by a DSI sampler. Can someone expand upon what was compelling about those old early samplers? I have no experience with them.
-
My notions would be:
- Lo-fi sound
- analog filters
- synthesis programming
- immediate all-in-one sampling workflow
Those things, but also my EPS16+ has very useable polyphonic aftertouch, and with creative routings (xstart and loop position for example) to aftertouch and the mod wheel, it creates a level of expressiveness AND control that I've never experienced any other way. So part of it is the sample manipulation capabilities they programmed in, where a lot of other samplers might do repeats or other things that are more beat oriented.
-
Nice. I would enjoy an 8-track sequencer on any DSI keyboard.
I know a lot of keyboards are getting away from on board sequencers but I think for a sampler there’s no reason why you can’t include even a small one.
-
EPS16+ sounds amazing with deep programming/performance modulation connected to sample manipulation.
-
What about MPE? Seems like there are mixed feelings about this. Personally speaking, I think if MPE were implemented it would be better with piano action keys like the Synclavier, CS-80 or Prophet T8. I think synth action keys would be awkward and too easy to misplay articulations.
Also I would really like to see a touch strip across the synth as opposed to on the pitch/mod wheel side like the Prophet 12.
I think that would be the only real mindblowing thing they could do in the analog realm. Other than Multitimbrality of course which I doubt we'll ever see again.
-
MPE makes mostly sense on the side of MIDI implementation. No-one would expect DSI to come up with their own MPE controller attached to a synth, as there are already some alternatives to choose from. Besides, any sort of standard keyboard is too primitive if you wanna make full use of MPE. Even if a keyboard would allow for polyphonic aftertouch, that would only cover one aspect of possible articulations via MPE.
-
It may be nothing more than a little spring cleaning, but I noticed that Sweetwater has reduced the price of the OB-6 Keyboard to $2,700. In anticipation of a new instrument from DSI - and possibly one of flagship caliber - I would expect the elimination of something from the current DSI line. It will likely be the Prophet 12, or perhaps not.
-
Another "flagship" Umnn...hopefully not until my GC credit card zeros out next year. I can't keep up with these guys ;)
In all seriousness, I can avoid the GAS, unless it's going to be a PEK remake. By the way....Just got to the PEK for a few minutes yesterday after a month away from it. Whether it be nostalgia or just that darn blue I like, but I feel so at home on that instrument.
-
It may be nothing more than a little spring cleaning, but I noticed that Sweetwater has reduced the price of the OB-6 Keyboard to $2,700.
That looks like it's for an open-box/B-stock unit, I wouldn't read too much into it ;)
-
Yeah, I suppose that's the case. It says both "new" and "like new". Rats. I thought I was on to something. I guess I'm looking for hints of things to come.
-
Another "flagship" Umnn...hopefully not until my GC credit card zeros out next year. I can't keep up with these guys ;)
In all seriousness, I can avoid the GAS, unless it's going to be a PEK remake. By the way....Just got to the PEK for a few minutes yesterday after a month away from it. Whether it be nostalgia or just that darn blue I like, but I feel so at home on that instrument.
Hey, Soundquest. With a Poly Evolver Keyboard and a brand new Prophet 12, you should be immune to GAS for some time.
-
Good point Sacred Synthesis :)
-
Just curious....did anyone see this.....
https://www.facebook.com/davesmithinstruments/videos/1951007941590727/
-
Just curious....did anyone see this.....
https://www.facebook.com/davesmithinstruments/videos/1951007941590727/
Just saw this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWjNFleS8e4
Sounds like a sampler synth.
-
https://www.instagram.com/p/BiFFWPogJgP/
-
Hmmm possible sampler, Sequential name back, what sounds like VS waves, and the name "X".
They really do read these forums ;)
-
It'll be interesting to see what the sample ingest and playback capabilities are–but it might explain the job posting for a QNX developer within the last year (as one would need some robust real-time filesystem management to load and play large multisample maps).
This would definitely make me re-consider whether a Nord stage instrument was in my future or not, and is also a quite different take on the analogue + digital hybrid (Waldorf Quantum, Korg Prologue, Roland JD-XA, and other great instruments from the past).
-
X for crossover?
I'm surprised no one mentioned the 16 voice button...
-
Wow even picture now, Prophet X
http://www.synthanatomy.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/ProphetX.jpg (http://www.synthanatomy.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/ProphetX.jpg)
-
Instruments by 8Dio!!!
-
I'm at a complete loss as to what to expect next. I'm still pushing for one of the following
Prophet 20 with multitimbrality (although this could be tricky with finding a balance between menu diving and a direct hands on experience)
Prophet X (A complete digital synth with boy VS and FM capabilities as well as sampling).....but this could easily happen with an OS upgrade for the Prophet 12 that adds more VS waves and samples from the Prophet 2000 as oscillator shape options.
Much like how the Rev2 is essentially two Prophet 08s under one hood (with a better) layout could we see the same thing happen with the Prophet 6 as sort of a throwback to the Prophet 10? With the OPTION to hook a controller up to the synth and play each engine on separate keybeds as well as the ability to split and layer on a single keybed. With no menu in keeping true to the Prophet 6 tradition and layout.
Would we see an the idea Pioneer AS-1 as an actual successor of the Pro 2 with 4 independent VCO based AS-1 engines under one hood with a fatar keybed allowing 4 different patches and sequences to be played independently? The PRO-4?
More importantly to me....will we ever see the Sequential name on anything again?
I guess I better start buying lottery tickets.
-
Prophet X (A complete digital synth with boy VS and FM capabilities as well as sampling)
...
More importantly to me....will we ever see the Sequential name on anything again?
I guess I better start buying lottery tickets.
Well done!
And what's 8Dio?
-
This better come in a three-octave version! <ducks>
But seriously, it looks and sounds amazing. I can't wait to learn more.
The picture, of course, from a synth geek's perspective, is rubbish. It looks like there are enough back-panel labels to support audio inputs as well as outputs.
X for crossover?
Maybe. Or perhaps "cross-fading." The player in the demo is playing with those instrument knobs to bring individual parts in and out. Maybe there's a Wavestation element to the thing.
-
Prophet X (A complete digital synth with boy VS and FM capabilities as well as sampling)
...
More importantly to me....will we ever see the Sequential name on anything again?
I guess I better start buying lottery tickets.
Well done!
And what's 8Dio?
https://8dio.com/company/history-8dio/
-
The now standard DSI synthesizer frame has a wonderfully artful balance to it. The Prophet X looks much like the Prophet 12 - beautiful to the eyes. I notice the X has three OLED's and seemingly black wood cheeks. It will be exciting to see a spec sheet.
-
... Or perhaps "cross-fading." The player in the demo is playing with those instrument knobs to bring individual parts in and out. Maybe there's a Wavestation element to the thing.
"X for cross-fading" sounds reasonable
-
There is a new thread for the Prophet X, until DSI opens a new section for the instrument.
https://forum.davesmithinstruments.com/index.php/topic,2515.new.html#new
-
Yes I know I'm WAY early on this one but I figured now would be a good a time as any. I do firmly believe the next DSI synth is going to be an upgraded Poly Evolver or a completely digital form of synthesis (with VCFs and VCAs of course). I think Dave touched on digital synthesis recently with the Prophet 12 and a bit early with the Poly Evolver. Although there are digital oscillators in the Prophet X I'm speaking more in terms of FM synthesis and Vector Synthesis. Paul Dither's Sequential Waves design really got my mind racing. Perhaps instead of two touch strips on the side, we could get a ribbon controller just above the key bed. Could we get a Joystick? Could we see another collaboration but with John Bowen? Of course the dual effects engine of the P6/OB6 added and of course it has to be Blue lol.
-
I agree. Something at least reminiscent of the Poly Evolver will appear.
-
I posted my desire for a Rev2-ization of the PEK over in the PEK board. I'd also be happy with something that goes a bit beyond, maybe combining the Modal Animator with VS/Wavestation-style blending of waves, while also providing modulatable wavetables, all with the stereo filters from the PX.
But again, I'd buy the more-voices-and-modulation-and-effects version of the PEK sight unseen.
-
I posted my desire for a Rev2-ization of the PEK over in the PEK board. I'd also be happy with something that goes a bit beyond, maybe combining the Modal Animator with VS/Wavestation-style blending of waves, while also providing modulatable wavetables, all with the stereo filters from the PX.
But again, I'd buy the more-voices-and-modulation-and-effects version of the PEK sight unseen.
As long as it's blue lol
-
I posted my desire for a Rev2-ization of the PEK over in the PEK board. I'd also be happy with something that goes a bit beyond, maybe combining the Modal Animator with VS/Wavestation-style blending of waves, while also providing modulatable wavetables, all with the stereo filters from the PX.
But again, I'd buy the more-voices-and-modulation-and-effects version of the PEK sight unseen.
I'd be happy simply to get a Poly Evolver Keyboard in brand new condition to last for the long haul - no feature addition requests at all.
-
I'd be happy simply to get a Poly Evolver Keyboard in brand new condition to last for the long haul - no feature addition requests at all.
Not even a request for more polyphony? 8 voices?
-
I'd be happy simply to get a Poly Evolver Keyboard in brand new condition to last for the long haul - no feature addition requests at all.
Not even a request for more polyphony? 8 voices?
Yes, that would be nice. A ten-voice PEK would be a dream-come-true, but I was also considering the price.
-
I'm sorry, but I do not think that a reissue of the Evolver will be done... Dave allready said that the P12 was that really...
I actually believe that the next thing might be something that will utilize the new SSM Rossum chips that we now saw in the Prophet X... maybe it could even be an update to the Prophet 12... a lot of people have been asking for something multitimbral for studio use... i've seen these requests a lot, so it might even be something in that direction, using the SSM chips maybe... I'm certain that anything that would need a high voicecount like a multitimbral synth would be using chips instead of solid state filters etc.
Actually, what i would like to see is something a bit different... there have been many complaints when it comes to the Tempest, and i really think that this is an area where DSI should update it to a more advanced machine... this is a machine that would also benefit from the two new technologies that's in the PX... the sample part, so that a Tempest 2 could finaly have user samples, and the new SSM filter for the voices... but also including digital FX which I missed a lot when I had the Tempest, so that you're free from fiddling about with external FX on individual outputs... A Tempest 2, with added user sample support, internal FX and SSM filters is certainly something I'd like to see next... preferably with an option to have either 8 or 16 voices like with the REV2.
-
I'm sorry, but I do not think that a reissue of the Evolver will be done... Dave allready said that the P12 was that really...
No need to apologize. I agree. We're just dreaming out loud here.
-
I'm sorry, but I do not think that a reissue of the Evolver will be done... Dave allready said that the P12 was that really...
I actually believe that the next thing might be something that will utilize the new SSM Rossum chips that we now saw in the Prophet X... maybe it could even be an update to the Prophet 12... a lot of people have been asking for something multitimbral for studio use... i've seen these requests a lot, so it might even be something in that direction, using the SSM chips maybe... I'm certain that anything that would need a high voicecount like a multitimbral synth would be using chips instead of solid state filters etc.
Actually, what i would like to see is something a bit different... there have been many complaints when it comes to the Tempest, and i really think that this is an area where DSI should update it to a more advanced machine... this is a machine that would also benefit from the two new technologies that's in the PX... the sample part, so that a Tempest 2 could finaly have user samples, and the new SSM filter for the voices... but also including digital FX which I missed a lot when I had the Tempest, so that you're free from fiddling about with external FX on individual outputs... A Tempest 2, with added user sample support, internal FX and SSM filters is certainly something I'd like to see next... preferably with an option to have either 8 or 16 voices like with the REV2.
Dave also once remarked he would never do another VCO synth again....well...
I don’t see the Tempest 2 happening. There’s way to many options with the MPC stuff and even DSI’s collaboration with pioneer which had the P6 filter and user sampling. I think Dave philosophy is to stand out rather than fit in.
I think the key is listening to that interview Dave did with Paul Dither. He spoke about MPE, multitimbrality so I could see a four part multitimbral synth with 20 voices.
Personally, like I said, I would love for John Bowen and Dave to do a synth together again and create the ultimate digital/analog hybrid. Concepts of the Solaris meets the REV2 with the two digital oscillators having all the VS waves, hundred something waves licensed from Waldorf while two analog DCO (I’d hope for VCO’s but doubtful) from the REV2 but also with a Supersaw option as well. The joy stick and ribbon controller of the Solaris. Four part multitimbrality each with its own dual effects, sequence, arpeggiator and keyboard split zone. 10 voices stereo with 20 voice mono option. I mean essentially that is a Poly Evolver in concept but on steroids.
-
I'm sorry, but I do not think that a reissue of the Evolver will be done... Dave allready said that the P12 was that really...
I actually believe that the next thing might be something that will utilize the new SSM Rossum chips that we now saw in the Prophet X... maybe it could even be an update to the Prophet 12... a lot of people have been asking for something multitimbral for studio use... i've seen these requests a lot, so it might even be something in that direction, using the SSM chips maybe... I'm certain that anything that would need a high voicecount like a multitimbral synth would be using chips instead of solid state filters etc.
Actually, what i would like to see is something a bit different... there have been many complaints when it comes to the Tempest, and i really think that this is an area where DSI should update it to a more advanced machine... this is a machine that would also benefit from the two new technologies that's in the PX... the sample part, so that a Tempest 2 could finaly have user samples, and the new SSM filter for the voices... but also including digital FX which I missed a lot when I had the Tempest, so that you're free from fiddling about with external FX on individual outputs... A Tempest 2, with added user sample support, internal FX and SSM filters is certainly something I'd like to see next... preferably with an option to have either 8 or 16 voices like with the REV2.
Dave also once remarked he would never do another VCO synth again....well...
I don’t see the Tempest 2 happening. There’s way to many options with the MPC stuff and even DSI’s collaboration with pioneer which had the P6 filter and user sampling. I think Dave philosophy is to stand out rather than fit in.
I think the key is listening to that interview Dave did with Paul Dither. He spoke about MPE, multitimbrality so I could see a four part multitimbral synth with 20 voices.
Personally, like I said, I would love for John Bowen and Dave to do a synth together again and create the ultimate digital/analog hybrid. Concepts of the Solaris meets the REV2 with the two digital oscillators having all the VS waves, hundred something waves licensed from Waldorf while two analog DCO (I’d hope for VCO’s but doubtful) from the REV2 but also with a Supersaw option as well. The joy stick and ribbon controller of the Solaris. Four part multitimbrality each with its own dual effects, sequence, arpeggiator and keyboard split zone. 10 voices stereo with 20 voice mono option. I mean essentially that is a Poly Evolver in concept but on steroids.
The "Tempest 2" was my dream... not because i think it will ever happen... I know that Dave once talked about the work on the Tempest was exhausting, so I think he's probably scared of doing another one... still... I think there would be a good reason to make one that features the things that the first Tempest did not... It may not be DSI though, that will create this device... i don't know... and i really do not care either to be honest... I've learned not to expect anything from DSI... I'll just see what pops up, and if it catches my interrest, that gives you the least headaches ;)
-
I might be alone on this one, but Dave’s take on a Matrix 12 would be sweet!
-
I might be alone on this one, but Dave’s take on a Matrix 12 would be sweet!
In a way, every DSI synth was a take on the Matrix 12 – at least with regard to the almost modular mod matrix.
-
I might be alone on this one, but Dave’s take on a Matrix 12 would be sweet!
In a way, every DSI synth was a take on the Matrix 12 – at least with regard to the almost modular mod matrix.
That’s very true. I suppose then what I really want is a cross between the OB-6 and the Rev2 16 voice:
16 voices, bi-timbral
Oberheim VCOs and SVFs
4 LFOs
4 Envelopes
The “everything mod matrix” that we all love
Arpeggiator
Sequencer (for events like the Pro 2)
Effects are optional (IMHO)
I know the Rev 2 is very close to that, but the heart wants what the heart wants...
-
I suppose then what I really want is a cross between the OB-6 and the Rev2 16 voice:
16 voices, bi-timbral
Oberheim VCOs and SVFs
4 LFOs
4 Envelopes
The “everything mod matrix” that we all love
Arpeggiator
Sequencer (for events like the Pro 2)
Effects are optional (IMHO)
I know the Rev 2 is very close to that, but the heart wants what the heart wants...
In case you had SEM circuitry in mind: The Matrix 12 was entirely based on Curtis chips. But just like every Oberheim synth built after the OB-X, that didn't make it sound similar to any of Prophets, though. I'm surprised you didn't mention the multimode filter, which – next to the mod matrix itself – was one of the features that stood out the most. Based on 4 combined 1 pole circuits it allowed for 15 filter configurations in total. I guess the only modern analog poly that allowed for similar filter settings is the 008.
-
I’d be happy if whatever comes next has a five-octave Fatar TP9S keybed, pitch and mod wheels next to the keyboard and the sliders and sequencer from the Pro 2 (but polyphonic).
I’m still new to this. I think I’d be quite happy with the P6 if it weren’t for the short keyboard.
-
I'm surprised you didn't mention the multimode filter, which – next to the mod matrix itself – was one of the features that stood out the most. Based on 4 combined 1 pole circuits it allowed for 15 filter configurations in total. I guess the only modern analog poly that allowed for similar filter settings is the 008.
Yeah... that would be sweet, but realistically, I don’t think Sequntial would do it... I don’t know why I don’t think Dave would do it. I suppose I’m just basing that on the Filter variations he’s released thusfar.
-
I actually wouldn’t mind a four octave keyboard. It’s never hindered me with what I do. I think if you start adding splits and layers that’s the only time you really should have a larger keybed. Honestly, I think that the P6 and OB6 are probably going to be the last VCO based synths Dave does. I think he’s going to move on to different forms of synthesis and newer stuff for Sequential. I mean realistically...what else can he do with analog synthesis at this point?
-
...I mean realistically...what else can he do with analog synthesis at this point?
It's been done over and over and over again, as has my call for hybrid synths. I recently bought a Sallen-Key (Steiner) filter with an input at each pole. Makes for some interesting effects when sweeping the filter not too dissimilar to vector synthesis. Running a sample-based sound source into it's three inputs and modulating the sample/s via the same source as the filter modulation kept me nicely entertained for some hours last night.
-
Interesting to note...around the 430 mark he states Sequential has a new synth in the works!
https://youtu.be/2ReqlXhSD3M
-
Interesting to note...around the 430 mark he states Sequential has a new synth in the works!
Well, they always have a new synth in development so no surprise there. But if there one to be announced soon that would be very new. Interesting!
Thanks a lot for sharing the video.
-
Interesting to note...around the 430 mark he states Sequential has a new synth in the works!
Well, they always have a new synth in development so no surprise there. But if there one to be announced soon that would be very new. Interesting!
Thanks a lot for sharing the video.
No problem. :). My mind is racing on what it might be. New Poly Evolver? New Pro-something? A new Six Trak? A new Dual Keyboard Prophet 10 but with P6’s voicing?
-
My mind is racing on what it might be. New Poly Evolver? New Pro-something? A new Six Trak? A new Dual Keyboard Prophet 10 but with P6’s voicing?
It could be many things. Best advice is to just wait and see what it will be. Much easier that way!
As for guessing what comes next one have to resort to different disciplines (https://youtu.be/vt0Y39eMvpI?t=41s)!
. o O ( :-X )
-
It's either a Prophet 7, a Prophet 9, or a Prophet 11! Equally interesting, I wonder what instrument it will be replacing, if any. I say the Prophet 12 is next on the chopping block, or else, the Mopho x4.
-
It's either a Prophet 7, a Prophet 9, or a Prophet 11! Equally interesting, I wonder what instrument it will be replacing, if any. I say the Prophet 12 is next on the chopping block, or else, the Mopho x4.
There are many options on both voice architecture, user interface and product naming fronts. Not to mention all the products that can have a "Pro" prefix. So I have stopped guessing and are only curious to see if the voice architecture would interest me. Much easier that way!
-
I was only kidding! But since Dave is in a nostalgic mood these days, I wonder if the new instrument will look to one of his former instruments. Surely the Evolver line holds a special place. Just dreaming....
-
I think the Paul Dither interview with Dave gives clues on to what might be next : Multitimbrality, MPE etc.
-
I was only kidding! But since Dave is in a nostalgic mood these days, I wonder if the new instrument will look to one of his former instruments. Surely the Evolver line holds a special place. Just dreaming....
Well, one can only hope that they mix tradition with new stuff and sometimes make more adventurous designs. But as said: lets wait and see what happens. Its so easy to be disappointed if the expectations are too high.
-
I agree. I gave up on the guessing game long ago. Besides, I'm fine with whatever DSI makes. They've never made a synthesizer I didn't like.
-
I agree. I gave up on the guessing game long ago. Besides, I'm fine with whatever DSI makes. They've never made a synthesizer I didn't like.
That’s the problem... my wallet can’t take another one yet.
-
Besides, I'm fine with whatever DSI makes. They've never made a synthesizer I didn't like.
I prefer to say that I find all DSI/Sequential designs interesting but I like some of the designs more than the other designs.
-
You know I wouldn’t even mind if it’s was another four octave synth. I know a lot of people don’t like them but I’ve actually grown to appreciate my Prophet 6. Especially since it’s Mono timbral.
-
Given the 40th anniversary one might expect some kind of Prophet 5 homage (though Dave said he wasn’t into reissues).
I think I might put off my next purchase for a while to see what this is.
-
I'd like to see DSI produce the modern equivalent of the Mopho x4. It would be a refreshing change to offer a smaller less expensive instrument, something that gathers up the many technical advances DSI/Sequential has made over the last several years. It could serve as both a small analog polyphonic and a monophonic instrument, something like a reduced version of the Rev2, but different.
-
I'd like to see DSI produce the modern equivalent of the Mopho x4. It would be a refreshing change to offer a smaller less expensive instrument, something that gathers up the many technical advances DSI/Sequential has made over the last several years. It could serve as both a small analog polyphonic and a monophonic instrument, something like a reduced version of the Rev2, but different.
Or possibly the idea of a Pro4. Four VCO based Mono synths under the hood which each can have their own effect, patch, sequence. Can be split, or layered across the keyboard and configured in different settings with some engines being controlled by the sequencers and some controlled by the keyboard etc. Sort of like 4 Pioneer AS1 units chained together with a keyboard.
-
Given the 40th anniversary one might expect some kind of Prophet 5 homage (though Dave said he wasn’t into reissues).
I think I might put off my next purchase for a while to see what this is.
I mean that’s essentially what the P6 is.
-
Given the 40th anniversary one might expect some kind of Prophet 5 homage (though Dave said he wasn’t into reissues).
I think I might put off my next purchase for a while to see what this is.
I mean that’s essentially what the P6 is.
Aside from the short keyboard. :)
-
Given the 40th anniversary one might expect some kind of Prophet 5 homage (though Dave said he wasn’t into reissues).
I think I might put off my next purchase for a while to see what this is.
I mean that’s essentially what the P6 is.
Aside from the short keyboard. :)
And more features and stability.
-
Plus the P6's 2040 based filters are discrete. I remember Dave chuckling when talking about folks who claim the old Prophets are so much better sounding than the P6.
On a side note - I'm curious if there's any word on whether the current DSI labeled line-up will be rebranded as Sequential going forward?
-
On a side note - I'm curious if there's any word on whether the current DSI labeled line-up will be rebranded as Sequential going forward?
I asked that very question via a comment on their Facebook announcement but haven’t heard anything.
-
Plus the P6's 2040 based filters are discrete. I remember Dave chuckling when talking about folks who claim the old Prophets are so much better sounding than the P6.
On a side note - I'm curious if there's any word on whether the current DSI labeled line-up will be rebranded as Sequential going forward?
I don’t think so but you never know. I’m pretty sure this is why they already have a new synth almost ready to go. Want to just start pumping out some Sequential gear cause so far they only have two out of their lineup.
-
It's a shame that Doug Curtis isn't with us anymore. I would have loved to see a new development of the "synth on a chip" for use in future sequential products.
Some ideas I had for an evolved chip:
- Provide inter-oscillator modulation. FM might not be possible (for DCO), but perhaps AM and RM modulation would have been possible (or just a simple MS20 style XOR logic)
- Switchable sub octave generator (comparator based?) SH101 style (-1 oct square, -2 octave square, -2 octave 25% pulse)
- Individual levels for OSC1 and OSC2
- Possible to not only clip, but also overdrive/saturate the signal path pre/post filter
- Filter pole/phase output mixing for the filter so that it's possible to build different filter modes a'la Oberheim Xpander
- Optional gain cell for feedback so that it's possible to incorporate gain compensation, greater freedom to tweak the filter character
- Optional gain/drive/saturation for the amplifier
-
I'd like to see DSI produce the modern equivalent of the Mopho x4. It would be a refreshing change to offer a smaller less expensive instrument, something that gathers up the many technical advances DSI/Sequential has made over the last several years. It could serve as both a small analog polyphonic and a monophonic instrument, something like a reduced version of the Rev2, but different.
It would likely end up too expensive, but I have entertained the idea of a Mopho X6 with the SSI2144 filter. >:D
-
Rev2 Evolver... REvolver
-
Rev2 Evolver... REvolver
I really like that idea.
-
Rev2 Evolver... REvolver
I really like that idea.
As do I....I just hate the name.
-
Could be a monosynth loosely based on the P6 or OB6 voices....
-
Could be a monosynth loosely based on the P6 or OB6 voices....
Mmm I can't see Sequential doing a Mono synth as that market is oversaturated. What I can see happening is Four AS1 engines under one keyboard hood. So four mono synths, each with their own sequencer, patch and effect happening. Thus testing the waters with Multitimbrality.
-
I still would like to see a collaboration between John Bowen and Dave Smith.
-
I'd like to see Dave do a kazoo named "Sequential - Noise"... it must be polyphonic and multitimbral, and fully MIDI spec'ed, and also upgradeable with an add-on nose flute.
I'm so looking forward to seeing Dave in an introduction video for this, calling it "his greatest synth, and first to actually have a breath controller built in".
-
As do I....I just hate the name.
Well what the heck do you know abouting naming DSI/Sequential synths? :) 8)
-
As do I....I just hate the name.
Well what the heck do you know abouting naming DSI/Sequential synths? :) 8)
;)
-
I'd like to see a new eurorack module, perhaps the osc setup of the Evolver? That'd sate that eternal cry for an Evolver revival of some sort maybe?
I'd like to see Dave do a kazoo named "Sequential - Noise"... it must be polyphonic and multitimbral.....
Isn't that called an "Harmonica"? ;) I do remember wanting a Jew's Harp in the early 90's....
-
As far as MPE goes...this might be an option for Sequential to look into...https://www.gearnews.com/touchkeys-brings-mpe-piano-keyboard/
-
As far as MPE goes...this might be an option for Sequential to look into...https://www.gearnews.com/touchkeys-brings-mpe-piano-keyboard/
Or something like the sideways aftertouch triggering on this this:
https://youtu.be/oewD_ujYBng
-
Yeah Synton is also another excellent choice but I do believe that’s only monophonic. I could be wrong.
-
Hope this gets announced soon, but I'm guessing it's next year's synth...
-
Honestly I think Sequential may go back to doing pure analog stuff. With the PX’s support by 8Dio being pushed back months now and the headache they got from the Tempest, I think Dave doesn’t want to do any more collaborations or anything outside the norm of analog again. I hope I’m wrong but if I’m not I’d like to see more VCO based stuff cause I think the P6 and OB6 still sound better than the REV2.
-
Exactly how does possible issues with collaborative work equate to the assumption of going "back to doing pure analog stuff" only? They can do some kind of next gen digital osc synth with nicer filters like the SSI2144 or even their discrete SSM2040 based filter.
-
Exactly how does possible issues with collaborative work equate to the assumption of going "back to doing pure analog stuff" only? They can do some kind of next gen digital osc synth with nicer filters like the SSI2144 or even their discrete SSM2040 based filter.
Possibly but with Waldorf around I don’t see them doing a digital osc only synth. Maybe a new Poly Evolver with both analog and digital oscillators. I can see that and would love that. Still.. I hope they do one more VCO based synth...likely it won’t be a Poly with Moog’s polysynth in the works but still.
-
Honestly, I'm not sure what SCI will be doing next... only thing I know is that it is probably something that Dave has not been doing and is not giving much competition to the other devices he's made... because that seems to be the norm here... they overlap, but all synths have something unique... thus I'm not that certain an all analog discrete VCO/VCF synth is in the horizon right at the moment... OB6 and P6 covers enough ground on that.
Also, just changing something like the filter chips (Evolver replica) I do not see as the next step really... unless it has tons of new stuff that simply sets it apart.
But one thing I think that SCI should probably think more about in the future, is their FX section... it's simply too limited compared to other synths capabilities like the Quantum, One and DeepMind12 etc... they need more FX slots, more routing capabilities and better FX (more of them) to beat the competition... so even if people think they would not colaborate, I'd highly suggest SCI to do just that on the FX if they cannot deliver the quality and flexibility themselves... I'd peronaly like to see them make a deal with Valhalla DSP for example... they would be able to deliver on the FX department.
I could see a need for a degraded version of their new flagship though... one that takes focus only on sample use, discarded the digital oscillators, and maybe even cut the voicecount down to 8 to reduce cost, leaving stereo capability out... if you're a sound designer you can easily create stereo depth even if the samples are in mono... with an improved FX section it would be even more easy to do... stereo samples are cool, but absolutely not essential in any way... in fact there are advantages to using mono samples as well for sound design... especially looping of samples is a hell of a lot easier with mono samples (unless you use crossfading of course).
-
I can see the P12 and Mophox4 being on the chopping block next. I just have a feeling.
-
I still have a feeling though a new Poly Evolver….not in name but in concept is next.
Two analog oscillators, two digital oscillators (Wavetables, VS waves, FM etc).
More polyphony (with a 10 voice version and 20 voice version)
Multitimbrality (Each oscillator can have it's own sequence, arpeggiator, effect and patch)
More effects (I'd like to see a Harmonizer or Reverse Delay).
XYZ pad.
Patch selection buttons like on the P6 and OB6.
And blue lights.
-
Now that the magical $3,000 mark has been crossed, why not?
-
Now that the magical $3,000 mark has been crossed, why not?
Might as well at this point lol
-
We can only imagine what effect the existence of the Moog One will have on DSI, but I do think that, in a general way, the former company has wandered into the letter's traditional territory. I hope this doesn't discourage DSI from creating what I've long hoped they would produce - a large all-analog poly synth substantially bigger than the Prophet '08/Rev2. I'm still waiting and hoping for this.
I'd agree that the Prophet 12 probably will not be around for long, and that will leave a vacuum at the top, in spite of the Prophet X. It would be a good time for a new DSI flagship. I'd be happy to see a more reasonably-priced mega-synth, versus the One. Personally, I would never sink such an immense amount of money into a single instrument - first, because I would never have it, and second, because I would much rather have a keyboard version/module version pair. That alone has me always favoring DSI synthesizers and the DSI approach.
So, I hope the Moog One motivates DSI to produce a more reasonably priced large scale VCO masterpiece, if they aren't working on one already. Say, an expanded Prophet-6.
And then there's the beautiful and magnificent Poly Evolver Keyboard - just waiting to be revived. She still strikes me as the gem in the DSI line.
-
Maybe a slightly expanded P-6 as a sort of 40th anniversary edition.
-
Right. The P-6 would be a natural place to start. "That sound," but with expanded size and control. Or a Rev2 with VCO's.
-
Maybe a slightly expanded P-6 as a sort of 40th anniversary edition.
Hmmm and maybe with an option lower manual keybed that it can rest on. Sort of like how Crumar does it with their organs.
-
Maybe a slightly expanded P-6 as a sort of 40th anniversary edition.
Ugh...your designs always make me salivate.
-
Maybe a slightly expanded P-6 as a sort of 40th anniversary edition.
Ugh...your designs always make me salivate.
... an 18 voice, tri-timbral... wait for it... Prophet 18 -- in 2018 no doubt.
too gimmicky?
-
Maybe a slightly expanded P-6 as a sort of 40th anniversary edition.
Ugh...your designs always make me salivate.
... an 18 voice, tri-timbral... wait for it... Prophet 18 -- in 2018 no doubt.
too gimmicky?
Go big or go home. Prophet-20.
-
Maybe a slightly expanded P-6 as a sort of 40th anniversary edition.
Ugh...your designs always make me salivate.
... an 18 voice, tri-timbral... wait for it... Prophet 18 -- in 2018 no doubt.
too gimmicky?
Go big or go home. Prophet-20.
As long as we aren't waiting until 2020
-
I'd like to see a synth from SCI with a voice architecture like the one I've made a picture off here.
You could say that it could be some sort of "Evolver 2", but that's not really the point.
My initial idea was, that two simple analog oscillators was converted into digital, and then used a sources for further manipulation in a powerful per voice DSP chip. There are many options as what to do with the converted sources before being output into an analog filter and amp (still with stereo separation in the signal path), so only the imagination will be the limit here... I could very well see this DSP module being set up like choosing algorithms, and if the DSP has some built in memory, it would give lots of options for crazy algorithms.
Regarding the UI I clearly see the DSP module given a big screen with parameter navigation buttons/knobs.
What the filters should be could be discussed, but I would not mind it being the new filters from the Prophet X... point is, that digital filters could and should be easily implemented in some of the DSP algorithms as well, so it's not overly necessary to have costly analog filters after the DSP... I don't want this synth to cost the same as a MOOG ONE :)
I've only drawn out the voice architecture, but certainly there will also be the control modulation section as usual with all the LFOs and EGs etc. plus the obligatory FX sections at the end of the signal chain.
The reason for this voice architecture is that when the audio sources are converted from an analog oscillator, then their analog nature will permeate all the way down thru the digital DSP path before being converted back into analog before the analog filter and amp... all the imperfections will be kept down the line.
My initial idea was to use the sources as "accumulators" for looking up digitally stored waveforms in memory for example. using a simple ramp up waveform on an analog oscillator like this would create a digital "copy" of the analog waveform, but with all the imperfections transfered to the stored waveform... and if the waveform is changed on the analog oscillator, you'd get crazy waveshapings going on in the result...
This is but one example... many other creative uses could be made, making a huge potential in sonics.
Somehow dreaming about the DSP module of this being made open source which could potentially make this synth's potential explode, but it would probably be easier to create a fixed set of algorithms.
-
I've been messing around a Korg EX-8000, and I realize there's something I really like from their LFOs that I think are missing from other implementations--the delay feature. Just having a little delay to allow the attack portion to finish before the LFO kicks in can be really useful. I'd even be happy if that's something behind a menu like on the P12's envelope delay. Knob real estate is precious and expensive.
Speaking of envelopes, another feature that the DW/EX-8000 has are the slightly more complicated envelopes. You have that in the Moog One, too, and while I realize that most people don't bother, having the extra break point and slope parameter allows for some really interesting and more natural decay patterns--or something really odd since "natural" is rarely what I'm going for. The D-50's multi-point and time system is probably overkill, but just an extra element would be nice. I'd rate this far less useful than the delay on the LFOs, though--especially since you can get some of this effect by layering.
-
I've been messing around a Korg EX-8000, and I realize there's something I really like from their LFOs that I think are missing from other implementations--the delay feature. Just having a little delay to allow the attack portion to finish before the LFO kicks in can be really useful. I'd even be happy if that's something behind a menu like on the P12's envelope delay. Knob real estate is precious and expensive.
Speaking of envelopes, another feature that the DW/EX-8000 has are the slightly more complicated envelopes. You have that in the Moog One, too, and while I realize that most people don't bother, having the extra break point and slope parameter allows for some really interesting and more natural decay patterns--or something really odd since "natural" is rarely what I'm going for. The D-50's multi-point and time system is probably overkill, but just an extra element would be nice. I'd rate this far less useful than the delay on the LFOs, though--especially since you can get some of this effect by layering.
This can be simulated with the modulation matrix ... just route the AUX envelope to the LFO Amount... it'll cost a slot in the matrix and an EG of course...
-
This can be simulated with the modulation matrix ... just route the AUX envelope to the LFO Amount... it'll cost a slot in the matrix and an EG of course...
Yep. I've done that. It just seems a simple thing to add, and frees up the EG for other things. Especially on a synth with only two or even three EGs, that can be very helpful.
-
OK, so my comments are all for the one AFTER the next new one:
https://www.synthtopia.com/content/2018/10/19/sequential-prophet-xl-sneak-preview/
(Please delete if this is a faux pas.)
-
The time has come. I cast my vote for some strikingly similar configuration of a Prophet VS/Poly Evolver Keyboard.
-
The time has come. I cast my vote for some strikingly similar configuration of a Prophet VS/Poly Evolver Keyboard.
Hope it has a joystick! Lol
-
The time has come. I cast my vote for some strikingly similar configuration of a Prophet VS/Poly Evolver Keyboard.
Yeah, an 8-voice PolyEvolver/VS hybrid would be a great, characterful instrument. Especially as a module. (Ahem. :))
-
The time has come. I cast my vote for some strikingly similar configuration of a Prophet VS/Poly Evolver Keyboard.
Yeah, an 8-voice PolyEvolver/VS hybrid would be a great, characterful instrument. Especially as a module. (Ahem. :))
Even a 10 voice 4 part multitimbral PolyEvolver.
-
I got to try a poly evolver today! Now thats what i call a creative design. 4 voices is a bit on the low side in 2018 though i feel!
-
Yeah, an 8-voice PolyEvolver/VS hybrid would be a great, characterful instrument. Especially as a module. (Ahem. :))
Sign me up for a module version so long as it has SSM-based filters.
-
I'm kinda hoping for a big brother to the OB-6. Otherwise I may piece together my own "OB-12" from a keyboard and module. But I would rather have it in one self contained unit -- I know that is a long shot, but hey, this thread is usually more pipe dream than prediction.
:)
-
I'm kinda hoping for a big brother to the OB-6. Otherwise I may piece together my own "OB-12" from a keyboard and module. But I would rather have it in one self contained unit -- I know that is a long shot, but hey, this thread is usually more pipe dream than prediction.
:)
I think with the UBXa from Behringer coming out and with the uncertainty of Tom Oberhiem doing any more musical instruments it would be interesting to see if Dave creates a separate department in Sequential and does Tom Oberhiem gear. It’s unlikely but I could see a big brother to the P6 down the road. I don’t think Sequential is going to be doing any VCO based synths for a while with the Moog One coming out, I think they are interested in doing different forms of synthesis right now, especially ones that seem scarce in the current synth market.....hmm... Prophet FM?
-
16 voice mono/8 voice stereo dual timbral upgrade of the P12 is what I'm hoping for at the moment. With an FPGA front-end to eliminate aliasing like on the PEAK. SSM filters plus analog HiPass filter per voice. Put an enhanced FX engine at the end of the chain as well.
I could speculate all the time about what it should include in synthesis, but as long as it has VA, FM, Wavetable and Formant synthesis I'd be happy...
I'd just like to see the P12 upped to the current hardware and design specs that DSI has put in their newer creations before I decide on getting a Prophet 12.
.....
With that said, there is something I'd like to see made one day, though it'll probably never happen... a kind of "mellotron like" sampler that behave in a very special way. I do not think I've seen anything do this, but here goes:
Every key on the keyboard should be it's own 48KHz, 16bit playback device... it should be able to play back a single looped sample at this exact rate and bit depth... no need to even pitch shift anything... just a lot of simple 44.1Khz 16bit sampleloop playback devices (see them a bit like a lot of looped tapes like in the Mellotron).
Now, an instrument is then build up of a looped sample for each of these keys... whenever you hit a key, the VCA for that sample will open and close as per a VCA envelope as usual, gating the sample.
The samples should be able to either retrigger on a gate, or simply be free running, the latter being VERY IMPORTANT since this will eliminate any static transients normally associated with samplers... the looped samples just simply needs to be carefully created to not have more movement going on in them, than they will sound good when gated in free running mode.
This in essence means that you would have a polyphony of 128 voices, but each key can only be triggered in mono... this has it's own charm all by itself.
It also means though, that VCAs would have to be digital, and not analog ones.... if any filter is to be added to each key as well, these should also be digital ones.. .the reason is obvious; you'd need 128 analog VCFs and VCAs if not... anything that should be per key, must be done digitally, or the cost and size would blow out of proportion. But this is not at all that bad since the samples can have all the analog character you could put into them anyway, and the quality would be pristine on ALL KEYS because they do no pitch transposition... so no aliasing.
Of course there should be the usual depth of the synth engine with modulation matrix for the digital VCA/VCF stuff.
I'd also like to see a CHARACTER section for each key giving you sampl emanipulation tools like bit crush, sample rate reduction and other "per sample based" tricks.
But we all know that we want something analog, at least something hybrid... and this is where I'd like for DSI to try something different... put in an ANALOG effects engine after the digital sample playback engine instead to warm up the digital part:
A real stereo analog BBD delay with feedback that will allow you to choose from different modulation FX like Chorus/Flanger/Phaser/Stringer Ensemble/Delay
A real stereo analog distortion/Waveshaper
A real stereo analog ring modulator
A real stereo analog filter (LP, HP and BP)
and in the end, the usual digital FX engine focusing on Delays and Reverbs
... if such a thing was available, it would make it on my top priority list for sure...
Samples could be imported by a simple SD card slot having folders that include all 128 looped samples for an instrument. There would not even be any need to create software for any mapping, as each sample name could just follow a simple naming structure, and editing the samples you can find lots of third party software for.
The trick is in the preparation of the samples... but the sheer amount of possibilities are staggering when you think about it... you could have a choir sample looped on all keys (if too many keys because of the human pitch range, keys can simply be left out) making it very realistic... you could sample any vintage synth or other on every key and have it play back perfectly without any chipmunk effects... you could put acoustic instrument's sustained notes in giving you a natural formant feel all over the keys... and even synthetically generated complex waveforms that retain formants or the like for every key.
Such a synth would be one hell of a PAD machine... it would be a dream synth for ambient genres for sure.
actually some of this could also be simulated on the Prophet X, if they just made a single feature update that would allow you to start playback of a sample at a random spot in the sample at each keypress... a rather simple feature addition really... it is not exactly like a free running sample of course, but it would still eliminate tha static feel of a retriggered sample...
-
16 voice mono/8 voice stereo dual timbral upgrade of the P12 is what I'm hoping for at the moment. With an FPGA front-end to eliminate aliasing like on the PEAK. SSM filters plus analog HiPass filter per voice. Put an enhanced FX engine at the end of the chain as well.
It's pretty silly going around making bold claims about what Sequential is likely or unlikely to do, but if I had to put my money on it, that's what I'd bet on. I guess I'm a bit biased though as that's what I'd be most interested in.
-
16 voice mono/8 voice stereo dual timbral upgrade of the P12 is what I'm hoping for at the moment. With an FPGA front-end to eliminate aliasing like on the PEAK. SSM filters plus analog HiPass filter per voice. Put an enhanced FX engine at the end of the chain as well.
It's pretty silly going around making bold claims about what Sequential is likely or unlikely to do, but if I had to put my money on it, that's what I'd bet on. I guess I'm a bit biased though as that's what I'd be most interested in.
Maybe a 10 voice stereo/20 Voice Mono.
-
The main reason I want FPGA is because even though P12 does sound nice when you just use simple VA style programing, then when you start to introduce FM or other audio rate modulation you will start to hear it's digital and harsh 11Khz bandlimit... it simply cannot do it with enough quality when you do rough audio rate modulations... PEAK gets around this because they run the modulation engine inside the FPGA at insanely high speed compared to normal 48KHz DSP chips.
With PEAK and also the coming Waldorf Phoenix synth, more and more high-end digital synths will begin to emerge using FPGA synthesis, so Sequential can just as well start to get it, or get left behind...
-
With PEAK and also the coming Waldorf Phoenix synth, more and more high-end digital synths will begin to emerge using FPGA synthesis, so Sequential can just as well start to get it, or get left behind...
What is this “new Waldorf Phoenix synth” of which you speak? Is this different from the Kyra?
-
With PEAK and also the coming Waldorf Phoenix synth, more and more high-end digital synths will begin to emerge using FPGA synthesis, so Sequential can just as well start to get it, or get left behind...
What is this “new Waldorf Phoenix synth” of which you speak? Is this different from the Kyra?
Erm... I believe it was renamed to KYRA by Waldorf, but it is the same synth as far as I recall? ... or was it called "Valkyrie"?
-
With PEAK and also the coming Waldorf Phoenix synth, more and more high-end digital synths will begin to emerge using FPGA synthesis, so Sequential can just as well start to get it, or get left behind...
What is this “new Waldorf Phoenix synth” of which you speak? Is this different from the Kyra?
Erm... I believe it was renamed to KYRA by Waldorf, but it is the same synth as far as I recall? ... or was it called "Valkyrie"?
Yes, the original British developer called it the Valkyrie.
I keep wanting to think of it as the Virus 3, but somehow I think the Virus TI2 might still be preferable to this thing. I haven’t been overly impressed by what’s been described so far — I probably missed something. I should go back and re-watch those videos.
-
With PEAK and also the coming Waldorf Phoenix synth, more and more high-end digital synths will begin to emerge using FPGA synthesis, so Sequential can just as well start to get it, or get left behind...
What is this “new Waldorf Phoenix synth” of which you speak? Is this different from the Kyra?
Erm... I believe it was renamed to KYRA by Waldorf, but it is the same synth as far as I recall? ... or was it called "Valkyrie"?
Yes, the original British developer called it the Valkyrie.
I keep wanting to think of it as the Virus 3, but somehow I think the Virus TI2 might still be preferable to this thing. I haven’t been overly impressed by what’s been described so far — I probably missed something. I should go back and re-watch those videos.
As far as I remember, it was pretty well spec'ed... not that it had anything new, it just had a hell of a lot of what already is, and at FPGA speed meaning a lot better sound quality... especially with heavy audio rate modulations... but I still have to see further specs etc. before that one will catch my interest... especially some sound examples... in fact i prefer at least analog or hybrid devices, so I'm not sure I'll ever get this, no matter how good it is...
-
But why not go head to head with Moog with a 2 VCO/2 digital OSC, Pro2 filter and sequencer, 4 LFO synth for $4000-4500 8 voice and $6000-6500 16 voice?
Sequential Two. :o Electric Boogaloo :o :o
They have all that technology.
-
Sequential Two. :o Electric Boogaloo :o :o
They have all that technology.
They’d also have my money.
Especially if they did it with stereo filters.
Anyone know if Dave & Crew will be at NAMM?
-
But why not go head to head with Moog with a 2 VCO/2 digital OSC, Pro2 filter and sequencer, 4 LFO synth for $4000-4500 8 voice and $6000-6500 16 voice?
That would be a reversal of the DSI/Sequential modus operandi. It would then be obvious that Dave was merely responding to Moog. Dave seems, rather, to do his own thing and often lead the way. If there's a discernible direction he is following and has been for years, I think he should continue in it. It's original and produces outstanding instruments, such as the Prophet 12. Yes, competition is an inescapable factor, but I think the best competition here is for Sequential to master it's corner of the synthesizer industry.
-
But why not go head to head with Moog with a 2 VCO/2 digital OSC, Pro2 filter and sequencer, 4 LFO synth for $4000-4500 8 voice and $6000-6500 16 voice?
It would then be obvious that Dave was merely responding to Moog.
It would look like it now, yes. But this was a request from DSI owners from the moment the Pro2 was made.
-
Anyone know if Dave & Crew will be at NAMM this year?
-
Anyone know if Dave & Crew will be at NAMM this year?
I somehow doubt it. I know NAMM is usually based around musical instrument distributors but it does offer a big platform for coverage on social media. I was talking to a few people when the Prophet X was announced and a lot of them had no idea about it....and in some cases still don't.
-
Anyone know if Dave & Crew will be at NAMM this year?
Didn't they skip it last year? Perhaps they've moved on.
-
Anyone know if Dave & Crew will be at NAMM this year?
Didn't they skip it last year? Perhaps they've moved on.
I'm pretty sure that you're right (about them skipping NAMM last year); however, they have released new products at NAMM in the past, so....
-
It hasn't been long since the PX and PXL were released, so it would be remarkable if Sequential already had another instrument ready to go.
I wonder if the Prophet 12 will be replaced next.
-
I wonder if the Prophet 12 will be replaced next.
That would seem logical. In the past, hasn’t there been very little time between the announcement of a discontinued model and announcement of a newer one?
-
I wonder if the Prophet 12 will be replaced next.
That would seem logical. In the past, hasn’t there been very little time between the announcement of a discontinued model and announcement of a newer one?
It will... i can feel it somehow... but you can be certain, that the P12 will have something, that some would want, that the new one will not have... just like many still miss some of the Evolver features in the P12.
-
I wonder if the Prophet 12 will be replaced next.
That would seem logical. In the past, hasn’t there been very little time between the announcement of a discontinued model and announcement of a newer one?
It will... i can feel it somehow... but you can be certain, that the P12 will have something, that some would want, that the new one will not have... just like many still miss some of the Evolver features in the P12.
I would find it very difficult to see how the P12 could be preferred over an updated version. No digital effects, no sequencer...nah I think this new instrument is going to blow both the Poly Evolver and P12 out of the water. Now what would remain to be seen...err...heard rather, is if it will blow something like the Peak out of the water.
It would be cool to see John Bowen and Dave collaborate for this one. I know I know two collaborations in a row but John has been by Dave’s side during the early days of the Prophet 5 and helped with the Prophet VS, it would be nice to see Bowen’s idea for the front end of the Solaris (with an insane amount of oscillator and Wavetable options) going through the Pro 2s dual analog filter concept (an SSM based filter and state variable SEM based filter). Add the VS/Solaris joy stick and a MPE supported ribbon controller, maybe 4 part multitimbrality, 10 Voice polyphony with an expansion card to 20 voices and you would blow almost everything else on the market out of the water.
-
I wonder if the Prophet 12 will be replaced next.
That would seem logical. In the past, hasn’t there been very little time between the announcement of a discontinued model and announcement of a newer one?
It will... i can feel it somehow... but you can be certain, that the P12 will have something, that some would want, that the new one will not have... just like many still miss some of the Evolver features in the P12.
I would find it very difficult to see how the P12 could be preferred over an updated version. No digital effects, no sequencer...nah I think this new instrument is going to blow both the Poly Evolver and P12 out of the water. Now what would remain to be seen...err...heard rather, is if it will blow something like the Peak out of the water.
It would be cool to see John Bowen and Dave collaborate for this one. I know I know two collaborations in a row but John has been by Dave’s side during the early days of the Prophet 5 and helped with the Prophet VS, it would be nice to see Bowen’s idea for the front end of the Solaris (with an insane amount of oscillator and Wavetable options) going through the Pro 2s dual analog filter concept (an SSM based filter and state variable SEM based filter). Add the VS/Solaris joy stick and a MPE supported ribbon controller, maybe 4 part multitimbrality, 10 Voice polyphony with an expansion card to 20 voices and you would blow almost everything else on the market out of the water.
Point was, that the P12 WAS an updated Evolver... still the Evolver has some technical advantages to the P12, and have a different character as well... so even if the replacement will outperform the P12 on paper, there is no guarantee it will in practice... I'm sure there will be features from the P12 missing on a replacement, which, for some, will be more than enough to have both ;)
-
I could never buy the claim that the P12 is an updated Poly Evolver. I used the two instruments side-by-side and found them to belong to totally different categories. One could not replace the other in a meaningful way. Instead, I thought they nicely complimented each other. No, I'm still waiting for the new Poly Evolver.
-
I could never buy the claim that the P12 is an updated Poly Evolver. I used the two instruments side-by-side and found them to belong to totally different categories. One could not replace the other in a meaningful way. Instead, I thought they nicely complimented each other. No, I'm still waiting for the new Poly Evolver.
But still, that is what replies have been from DSI when the topic of a new Evolver have been up... That is why I do not believe that any new digital front end synth to replace the P12 will make the P12 redundant in any way...I still crave some features from the Evolver that only it can do... Mixed oscillators, true stereo path, user waveforms and the sequencers.
-
Part of me is hoping that, since Tom has wound up his own production, there might be some further Oberheim/Sequential collaboration.
I’m in that slightly annoying position where I’ve saved up for my first poly and don’t know whether to go for something that’s already out there or wait and see what’s around the corner.
I wasn’t taken with the P12 (neither the filter, the feel of the keybed nor the lack of sequencer/effects appealed to me), which is a shame as other aspects were very appealing (4 oscillators, linear FM, 5 octave keyboard, extra performance sliders, deep mod matrix).
Of the remainder it’s between the P6, OB-6 and Rev 2 and I like them all for different reasons. I’d rather have 5 octaves but the P6 and OB-6 sound so good. I also connected really quickly with these two and got into making good sounds fast. The Oberheim filter is lovely. I also really like the idea of having a live panel mode. Dual effects is a welcome bonus too. I’m torn, on the one hand, the immediacy of the P6/OB-6 means I’m more likely to come up with musical ideas. The Rev 2 I’d probably spend much more time programming (which I’d also enjoy).
-
I could never buy the claim that the P12 is an updated Poly Evolver. I used the two instruments side-by-side and found them to belong to totally different categories. One could not replace the other in a meaningful way. Instead, I thought they nicely complimented each other. No, I'm still waiting for the new Poly Evolver.
But still, that is what replies have been from DSI when the topic of a new Evolver have been up...
IIRC, at NAMM 2013 the P12 was announced as a product that combines what were considered the best parts of the Evolver and those of the Prophet '08, which makes more sense in my opinion. Out came a synth that was as different from the Prophet '08 as it was from the Evolver.
-
I could never buy the claim that the P12 is an updated Poly Evolver. I used the two instruments side-by-side and found them to belong to totally different categories. One could not replace the other in a meaningful way. Instead, I thought they nicely complimented each other. No, I'm still waiting for the new Poly Evolver.
But still, that is what replies have been from DSI when the topic of a new Evolver have been up...
IIRC, at NAMM 2013 the P12 was announced as a product that combines what were considered the best parts of the Evolver and those of the Prophet '08, which makes more sense in my opinion. Out came a synth that was as different from the Prophet '08 as it was from the Evolver.
Yes... and thus, a new replacement for the P12 will most likely sport the same philosophy... so I bet people will still want the P12, even if the replacement is introduced...
-
I could never buy the claim that the P12 is an updated Poly Evolver. I used the two instruments side-by-side and found them to belong to totally different categories. One could not replace the other in a meaningful way. Instead, I thought they nicely complimented each other. No, I'm still waiting for the new Poly Evolver.
But still, that is what replies have been from DSI when the topic of a new Evolver have been up...
IIRC, at NAMM 2013 the P12 was announced as a product that combines what were considered the best parts of the Evolver and those of the Prophet '08, which makes more sense in my opinion. Out came a synth that was as different from the Prophet '08 as it was from the Evolver.
Yes... and thus, a new replacement for the P12 will most likely sport the same philosophy... so I bet people will still want the P12, even if the replacement is introduced...
Certainly. Given that philosophy, though, I also wouldn't expect a direct follow-up if any. Sequential never really did release any replacements or upgraded versions with the exception of the Rev2. I don't think we'll see the same happening with the Prophet 12 or any other already released synth, especially if you take into account that – at least from nowadays perspective – the Prophet X took over the role of the Prophet 12 as a flagship synth.
-
I could never buy the claim that the P12 is an updated Poly Evolver. I used the two instruments side-by-side and found them to belong to totally different categories. One could not replace the other in a meaningful way. Instead, I thought they nicely complimented each other. No, I'm still waiting for the new Poly Evolver.
But still, that is what replies have been from DSI when the topic of a new Evolver have been up... That is why I do not believe that any new digital front end synth to replace the P12 will make the P12 redundant in any way...I still crave some features from the Evolver that only it can do... Mixed oscillators, true stereo path, user waveforms and the sequencers.
I know, I know. It's been the standard line around here that the P12 is the new Poly Evolver. Sorry, but not by a mile. Without the exact same panned frothy digital oscillators and even the extremely long envelope times, there's little sense in making the claim. To do so was to mischaracterize the instrument and mislead the interested synthesist. To me, the P12 was a whole new synthesizer - brilliant in its own right, but altogether new and distinct from the other DSI/Sequential instruments.
-
I could never buy the claim that the P12 is an updated Poly Evolver. I used the two instruments side-by-side and found them to belong to totally different categories. One could not replace the other in a meaningful way. Instead, I thought they nicely complimented each other. No, I'm still waiting for the new Poly Evolver.
But still, that is what replies have been from DSI when the topic of a new Evolver have been up...
IIRC, at NAMM 2013 the P12 was announced as a product that combines what were considered the best parts of the Evolver and those of the Prophet '08, which makes more sense in my opinion. Out came a synth that was as different from the Prophet '08 as it was from the Evolver.
Yes, that makes a bit more sense as a reference point...and yet, it's still not how I would have described the instrument. The three synthesizers - the Poly Evolver Keyboard, Prophet '08, and Prophet 12 - would make a superb ensemble because each is substantially distinct from the others and in no way resembles the other's voices.
-
I could never buy the claim that the P12 is an updated Poly Evolver. I used the two instruments side-by-side and found them to belong to totally different categories. One could not replace the other in a meaningful way. Instead, I thought they nicely complimented each other. No, I'm still waiting for the new Poly Evolver.
But still, that is what replies have been from DSI when the topic of a new Evolver have been up...
IIRC, at NAMM 2013 the P12 was announced as a product that combines what were considered the best parts of the Evolver and those of the Prophet '08, which makes more sense in my opinion. Out came a synth that was as different from the Prophet '08 as it was from the Evolver.
Yes, that makes a bit more sense as a reference point...and yet, it's still not how I would have described the instrument. The three synthesizers - the Poly Evolver Keyboard, Prophet '08, and Prophet 12 - would make a superb ensemble because each is substantially distinct from the others and in no way resembles the other's voices.
That's true. And I think it's realistic to expect the next instrument to be just as complementary. After all, the Prophet X followed the same approach. It's not a replacement for any of these synths, but it incorporated certain elements from older synhs (hybrid oscillator section, stereo filters, doubled FX from the Rev2, etc.) while adding the sample playback.
-
I could never buy the claim that the P12 is an updated Poly Evolver. I used the two instruments side-by-side and found them to belong to totally different categories. One could not replace the other in a meaningful way. Instead, I thought they nicely complimented each other. No, I'm still waiting for the new Poly Evolver.
But still, that is what replies have been from DSI when the topic of a new Evolver have been up...
IIRC, at NAMM 2013 the P12 was announced as a product that combines what were considered the best parts of the Evolver and those of the Prophet '08, which makes more sense in my opinion. Out came a synth that was as different from the Prophet '08 as it was from the Evolver.
Yes... and thus, a new replacement for the P12 will most likely sport the same philosophy... so I bet people will still want the P12, even if the replacement is introduced...
Certainly. Given that philosophy, though, I also wouldn't expect a direct follow-up if any. Sequential never really did release any replacements or upgraded versions with the exception of the Rev2. I don't think we'll see the same happening with the Prophet 12 or any other already released synth, especially if you take into account that – at least from nowadays perspective – the Prophet X took over the role of the Prophet 12 as a flagship synth.
I really cannot see the Prophet X as taking the place of the Prophet 12... the digital side has been drastically reduced... waveforms are gone, the FM part is "broken", it lacks two of the oscillators, has no HiPass filter per voice (analog)... there are just so many things that was not ported over... this is also why I'm probably not going to wait and see what they come up with next time because I want a Prophet 12 next... no matter what.
-
I really cannot see the Prophet X as taking the place of the Prophet 12... the digital side has been drastically reduced... waveforms are gone, the FM part is "broken", it lacks two of the oscillators, has no HiPass filter per voice (analog)... there are just so many things that was not ported over... this is also why I'm probably not going to wait and see what they come up with next time because I want a Prophet 12 next... no matter what.
I didn't mean functionally, but in terms of being Sequential's new flagship synth. First was the PEK, then the Prophet 12, now the Prophet X. Each one is different of course.
-
Point was, that the P12 WAS an updated Evolver...
How do you figure this? They have pretty different architectures, oscillators, voice counts etc... it's pretty hard to reproduce either one with the other, when you are working towards what they are best at.
Seems more accurate to say the P12 was a new synth that took some inspiration from the Evolver line, but that had it's own DNA from the start, no?
-
First was the PEK, then the Prophet 12, now the Prophet X. Each one is different of course.
Crap. When you put it like that, I guess I *WILL* have to get a Prophet X someday. I wouldn't want to invite discontinuity. ;D
-
You guys are dashing my hopes for a successor / Big Brother to the OB-6....
-
Seems more accurate to say the P12 was a new synth that took some inspiration from the Evolver line, but that had it's own DNA from the start, no?
Absolutely.
-
You guys are dashing my hopes for a successor / Big Brother to the OB-6....
Considering the situation, I wouldn't be surprised if there was yet another Oberheim-ish project of a larger sort at Sequential. I would also be interested in such an instrument. I've long been a closet Oberheim guy. My intention had been to remain with Sequential, but also to add an Oberheim instrument or two. I've always thought their respective sounds wonderfully complimented each other, like sonic brothers.
-
...I still crave some features from the Evolver that only it can do... Mixed oscillators, true stereo path, user waveforms and the sequencers.
I would like a module that has the four Evolver oscillators, but with a a sub-oscillator and a method to upload user waves. Inputs for the various modulation destinations that are on the original and the slop function. The rest of the Evolver is doable using other modules. That would make me happy. I know that I could pull-off the digital waves with other modules but it's the Osc FM combined with stepping through the waves on the Evolver that sets that it aside from regular digital wave based oscillator blocks. Having that in the Eurorack format would be far more flexible than using an Evolver along side of a modular synth.
-
I'll not be foolish and hope for a revised Evolver... i do not believe it will happen, and thus, when I have the money, and the opportunity, I'll simply just get a second hand PEK... problem solved. i actually stopped guessing at what Sequential would be doing next because it really serves no current purpose, other than the dreaming away.
I have an interest in anything hybrid/analog with a deep synthesis engine these days... thus Evolver, Prophet X and Prophet 12 are all on my wish list along with the Waldorf Quantum ... Prophet 6 or OB-6, though probably very well sounding synths, simply will not give me what I want when it comes to the synth engine... it's not deep enough, not enough modulation capabilities. and on top of these requirements, the synths must also be with stereo outputs. I need to be able to modulate each voices panning as a minimum, so no mono-output synths will cut it either.
luckily, that does not leave that many available synths, but my wallet will thank me for that (if we forget about the Prophet 12 and Quantum that is... ::) )
-
i actually stopped guessing at what Sequential would be doing next because it really serves no current purpose, other than the dreaming away.
Yeah, I've noticed this thread does tend to be a list of dreams as much as it is a prediction thread. If I am honest, I'd like to see all of the smaller companies just take a break from releasing a flagship every year and do something smaller. Sequential have trimmed down their line to 'boards mostly, which does reflect a market they are targeting, but also means a roomful of key for anyone hooked on Dave & Co. I understand that once a knobbox gets to a certain stage, it may as well have keys on it, but still yearn for an expander-style synth that can address all the finer details.
-
Ditto. I was a great fan of DSI's earlier days when their line-up of instruments allowed you opportunities to gradually build an instrument by adding voices and such. As in Evolver Desktop, Mopho Desktop, Tetra, Evolve Rack, etc., all of which I've owned. The Mopho x4 is the last fading trace of those days. Back then, you didn't have to empty your bank account every time you made a purchase. Since those little modules were retired, I've had a difficult time buying anything at all from my favorite synthesizer company.
Today I sold one of my Prophet '08 keyboards in an effort to finance a Rev2, and I still don't have enough money for it. It would be a very happy matter for some of us if DSI would again offer a broader range of instrument sizes and prices.
-
I’d like to see an analog vocoder.
-
Ditto. I was a great fan of DSI's earlier days when their line-up of instruments allowed you opportunities to gradually build an instrument by adding voices and such. As in Evolver Desktop, Mopho Desktop, Tetra, Evolve Rack, etc., all of which I've owned. The Mopho x4 is the last fading trace of those days. Back then, you didn't have to empty your bank account every time you made a purchase. Since those little modules were retired, I've had a difficult time buying anything at all from my favorite synthesizer company.
Today I sold one of my Prophet '08 keyboards in an effort to finance a Rev2, and I still don't have enough money for it. It would be a very happy matter for some of us if DSI would again offer a broader range of instrument sizes and prices.
I see the trend here for creating bigger and more expensive devices... the X being the most expensive thus far... since the Prophet 12, price just seems to have gone up slowly... and I bet that any new synth to replace the Prophet 12, will be in the Prophet X price range... this may be due to the fact that people seem to want more and more analog voices... we're now at 16 voices as a kind of standard... it's only a matter of time until we end at 32 voice, and a price to match that... I'm not sure how far they can elevate the prices before people start to drop the thought of buying, but seeing how many obviosuly want a MOOG ONE even if it cost twice that of a Prophet X I can only doubt...
I too would have liked to see a trend like with the REV2... start out at 8 voices, and then add modules with 8 more until you are satisfied... I really liked that idea... not everyone have discipline enough to wait 6 months to be able to afford a Prophet X...
-
I would like to see a new hybrid synth like the Prophet 12, but based on FPGAs like the PEAK.
I love the sound of my PEAK very much and the recent update made it an even more fantastic synth. Someone said he would buy 3 PEAKs and a good controller keyboard instead of buying a Moog One... and I can absolutely support that. The Moog sounds very good to me... but when it comes to bang for the buck I would prefer the mentioned 3-PEAK setup.
Back to topic. Even if I like my PEAK very much, I like the UI from DSI synth more. If I compare the PEAK to my Rev2 I must say there is much less menu diving on the Rev2 and dialing in modulations with the src and dest buttons is a far more quick workflow than scrolling through everything in the mod menue on the PEAK. I was very interested in the P12 also, but for my personal taste of sound it could not be compared to the PEAK and I didn't like the feel of the keys.
So basically I hope for a P12 Mk2 with following updates:
* more voices
* bigger mod matrix
* 2 effects per layer
* keybed of Rev2 or P6
* based on FPGA technology
-
Hopefully the next offering might bring multitimbrality to Sequential’s catalogue. Dave did say they were looking into it.
-
I was a great fan of DSI's earlier days... Back then, you didn't have to empty your bank account every time you made a purchase.
It would be a very happy matter for some of us if DSI would again offer a broader range of instrument sizes and prices.
But the market has changed a lot since then. Software has gotten a lot more competitive sound-wise, and arguably superior in some ways interface-wise (especially when it also maps to a hardware controller ala Omnisphere), the pricing low end of analog/physical has been lowered even further by Korg, Roland, and Behringer who have economies of scale DSI / Sequential will never compete with, the rise of modular has taken dollars away on the upper end, etc etc.
I think Dave HAS to only make high-end stuff now, to have a compelling enough offering that leverages DSI / Sequential's unique strengths and avoids the danger of going head-to-head against the strengths of the giant vendors.
For example the Mopho x4 is a far superior synth IMO to the DM6, but the DM6 is more popular and makes more money for Behringer than the Mopho x4 did for DSI because the DM6 has more voices, more modulations, great effects and is still cheaper. Nevermind the cheaper build quality, inferior sound etc. The fact is for a lot of people, the DM6 is "good enough" in those areas, and has "MOAR FEATURES".
So Dave has to build things that Behringer, Korg, Roland et al. never would, even if they theoretically could.
Like the PX.
-
Yes, I know, I know. The market has changed and Sequential has had to adapt to it. But musical needs are more of a constant.
I'm 100% in favor of Sequential building large instruments and always have been. I'm hoping they'll follow up the Prophet 12 with something comparable. Still, smaller instruments/modules can be a key element in building a large musical system. Modules are essential in my own set up, especially in the bass area.
I'm only dreaming, perhaps, but I do wish DSI would create a full-sized four-oscillator polyphonic synthesizer primarily with just the essentials. I see companies expanding their instruments in various directions, adding all sorts of features, but never in the direction of multiple oscillators. I'd love to have a six-oscillator poly synth, but how likely is it that we'll ever see such an instrument?
The Prophet Rev2 is great, but how about something more powerful...and reasonably priced? Give me a six-oscillator twelve-voice DCO synth with long envelope times, in both keyboard and module versions, and I'll be permanently content.
-
But musical needs are more of a constant.
I don't know that they entirely are that constant. To some degree, in terms of instrumentation where you'll want *something* to fill in each register, then sure. But very, very few people play keys these days like most people did in the 70s or 80s - musicianship has shifted away from playing to composing, and people just don't have the chops that players did back in the day. The music is also different, and styles often shift and develop with new technical possibilities - ie dubstep was largely enabled by the easy to program step-envelopes of Massive and other softsynths. And while those sounds are usually filling the bass/lead functions or sometimes chords/pads, it would have been either extremely difficult if not impossible to program those on older systems, so a designer has to either keep those in mind or risk not giving the market a design it wants to buy. Obviously the retro trend of the last 5-10 years is helping sustain the older, "simpler" designs of hardware vs software, but that will cycle back out soon enough, and designers have to look to where the ball is going as much as where it is now, or else wind up upside down on their investment in a product no one really wants anymore.
-
I did qualify my statement with the word "more."
I would agree with your comments, but they only support one of my constant points: an excessive dependence on technology has badly impacted music performance and composition. Most folks here will disagree with me, I realize. I'm obviouslly expressing an opinion, and one from the angle of a very different approach to both music and synthesis.
The obsession with stuff, with as much and as many gadgets as one can afford or fit in one's studio, has had its toll on music. Many people make music based on how many pieces of equipment they can squeeze into a song. An additional effect of this is an exaggerated emphasis on rhythm and beat. I would call it slavish, lacking all free rhythm to breathe.
It is possible to maintain a musicality without giving in to the obsession with equipment. One doesn't have to follow the mob or swim with the rest of the fish.
I'm not sure which drives which - whether it's merchandise or musicians that leads the way. I'm inclined to believe the former.
-
But very, very few people play keys these days like most people did in the 70s or 80s - musicianship has shifted away from playing to composing, and people just don't have the chops that players did back in the day.
A few minutes of searching on Youtube would say otherwise. There's plenty of channels of kids who live a life of one-upmanship. Popular music on the other hand has certainly taken a dive, but there's still plenty of bands that display an extreme level of musicianship. It's just easy these days for the average Joe to make music as anyone with a laptop can pretty much produce a track. Meaning it's a much broader field these days and much harder to break through as well. I'm sure anyone from the 18th century would say even the music that you're referring to has been immensely simplified. At the end of the day, it's all about striking an emotion with the listener and very little else matters.
To get back on track, I however agree that Sequential's main niche in the market is those who still seek excellence in their instruments.
-
It's just easy these days for the average Joe to make music as anyone with a laptop can pretty much produce a track.
Yes, that's true, especially with YouTube. It's easy to appear like a star for a video, with very little musical ability but all the right equipment, as well as some camera ability.
-
It's just easy these days for the average Joe to make music as anyone with a laptop can pretty much produce a track.
Yes, that's true, especially with YouTube. It's easy to appear like a star for a video, with very little musical ability but the right equipment.
Haha that would be me!
-
Actually I wouldn’t mind seeing more analog paraphonic synths or at least somehow have a mode or switch that turns a synth from Polyphonic to paraphonic. It really does have a unique sound to it.
Has Sequential ever had a vocoder for any of their synths? Past or present? Nothing I can recall. That might be a fun feature as well.
-
It's just easy these days for the average Joe to make music as anyone with a laptop can pretty much produce a track.
Yes, that's true, especially with YouTube. It's easy to appear like a star for a video, with very little musical ability but the right equipment.
Haha that would be me!
I wouldn't say so. Your videos don't seem at all vain or ostentatious to me, but to the point.
-
It's just easy these days for the average Joe to make music as anyone with a laptop can pretty much produce a track.
Yes, that's true, especially with YouTube. It's easy to appear like a star for a video, with very little musical ability but the right equipment.
Haha that would be me!
I wouldn't say so. Your videos don't seem at all vain or ostentatious to me.
I appreciate that. I’m just saying I have very little musical ability but the right equipment and a good ear for composition. I was thinking of going back to school to study music theory and composition but I found that in some cases it results in one’s work becoming more formulated. Not in all cases but I was watching an interview with composer Christopher Young and he said a great line “The problem with music schools is when you play something that sounds good and the teachers tell you “you are doing it wrong”. They listen with their theory and not their emotions. All that breeds is robots.”
-
I went to music school. Yes, there's some truth to what you say. But teachers are there to help you sharpen your musical ability...and then you never see them again. It's the same in sharpening any skill; the training period is important, and often boring, but it lasts for only a while, and then you're free to use it or not.
I worked very hard at music theory, especially harmony and counterpoint. It transformed my ability, especially in the improvisation department, and I would never want to be without that knowledge. I found that it set me free, musically speaking.
If you're always striving for something, but always falling short of it for lack of knowledge or ability, then you end up burning yourself out with frustration.
I would say, apply yourself to music theory and keyboard exercises, even if just on your own. Don't overlook self-instruction; it's a mightily powerful option. Theory and keyboard skills won't hurt you or turn you into a cold musical scientist, like some musical Doctor Frankenstein (That reference was for you!). No, they will only expand your ability, and thus, increase your potential for finding satisfaction in your own work.
-
I went to music school. Yes, there's some truth to what you say. But teachers are there to help you sharpen your musical ability...and then you never see them again. It's the same in sharpening any skill; the training period is important, and often boring, but it lasts for only a while, and then you're free to use it or not.
I worked very hard at music theory, especially harmony and counterpoint. It transformed my ability, especially in the improvisation department, and I would never want to be without that knowledge. I found that it set me free, musically speaking.
If you're always striving for something, but always falling short of it for lack of knowledge or ability, then you end up burning yourself out with frustration.
I would say, apply yourself to music theory and keyboard exercises, even if just on your own. Don't overlook self-instruction; it's a mightily powerful option. Theory and keyboard skills won't hurt you or turn you into a cold musical scientist, like some musical Doctor Frankenstein (That reference was for you!). No, they will only expand your ability, and thus, increase your potential for finding satisfaction in your own work.
Thanks! I think I'll consider it for sure!
-
I'm sure most of you already know this, but Sequential is on the Exhibitor List for 2019 NAMM... Rock On, Dave!
-
I didn't know that. Thanks for the good news, Shaw. I'd interpret it to mean they've got a new instrument ready to be announced.
-
I'm sure most of you already know this, but Sequential is on the Exhibitor List for 2019 NAMM... Rock On, Dave!
Oh man!! This is gonna be awesome!
-
I'm sure most of you already know this, but Sequential is on the Exhibitor List for 2019 NAMM... Rock On, Dave!
Oh man!! This is gonna be awesome!
The Sequential booth is listed as "TKAB" -- most others have a booth number. Nektar Technologies are listed in booth "TKCD". So perhaps Sequential and Nektar are sharing space in a different room from the main floor?
-
OK, so "TKAB" appears to be a small booth (or stage?) right outside the main entrance on the First Level. (see attached map)
Also, notice Dave have chosen a spot with an ATM machine right outside. Convenient! :)
-
It's funny that now we don't even try to guess what sort of instrument Sequential will next release. Years ago, on the old DSI/Prophet forum, we would all be making our best educated guesses, and some would actually get it right. Chris or Tracy would post close up images of the instrument on the forum just to add to the sport of it, and we'd rack our brains trying to figure out what it was. That was fun and exciting.
-
It's funny that now we don't even try to guess what sort of instrument Sequential will next release. Years ago, on the old DSI/Prophet forum, we would all be making our best educated guesses, and some would actually get it right. Chris or Tracy would post close up images of the instrument on the forum just to add to the sport of it, and we'd rack our brains trying to figure out what it was. That was fun and exciting.
I think the last teaser picture we got was from the Rev2, right?
Anyhow, after the last busy year I'd be surprised if there was already a new announcement at the NAMM show. I assume that they will mostly present the PX and PXL.
-
It's funny that now we don't even try to guess what sort of instrument Sequential will next release. Years ago, on the old DSI/Prophet forum, we would all be making our best educated guesses, and some would actually get it right. Chris or Tracy would post close up images of the instrument on the forum just to add to the sport of it, and we'd rack our brains trying to figure out what it was. That was fun and exciting.
I think the last teaser picture we got was from the Rev2, right?
Anyhow, after the last busy year I'd be surprised if there was already a new announcement at the NAMM show. I assume that they will mostly present the PX and PXL.
Gee, I don't remember the picture of the Rev2. I thought they stopped that long ago.
It seems as if Sequential/DSI always has an announcement. And since they will be at NAMM this year, I'm optimistically thinking there may at least be a word and an image about a Prophet 12 replacement. That's my hope.
-
It's funny that now we don't even try to guess what sort of instrument Sequential will next release. Years ago, on the old DSI/Prophet forum, we would all be making our best educated guesses, and some would actually get it right. Chris or Tracy would post close up images of the instrument on the forum just to add to the sport of it, and we'd rack our brains trying to figure out what it was. That was fun and exciting.
I think the last teaser picture we got was from the Rev2, right?
Anyhow, after the last busy year I'd be surprised if there was already a new announcement at the NAMM show. I assume that they will mostly present the PX and PXL.
Fingers crossed that your assumption is wrong. It would seem rather odd if they spent money and travel time to present a synth that’s been reviewed and demoed for almost a year now.
-
It's funny that now we don't even try to guess what sort of instrument Sequential will next release. Years ago, on the old DSI/Prophet forum, we would all be making our best educated guesses, and some would actually get it right. Chris or Tracy would post close up images of the instrument on the forum just to add to the sport of it, and we'd rack our brains trying to figure out what it was. That was fun and exciting.
I think the last teaser picture we got was from the Rev2, right?
Anyhow, after the last busy year I'd be surprised if there was already a new announcement at the NAMM show. I assume that they will mostly present the PX and PXL.
Fingers crossed that your assumption is wrong. It would seem rather odd if they spent money and travel time to present a synth that’s been reviewed and demoed for almost a year now.
Agreed. Makes no business sense for them to go through the time and effort to just say “hi folks”.
-
Fingers crossed that your assumption is wrong. It would seem rather odd if they spent money and travel time to present a synth that’s been reviewed and demoed for almost a year now.
Rather half a year than a year. And the PXL only started shipping 2 months ago.
In the past, not every NAMM visit went hand in hand with a product announcement. Several instruments (the final Tempest version I believe and certainly a couple of smaller desktop modules) have been announced before or after NAMM, particularly in the DSI days, and those were then presented later at the NAMM show. Keep in mind that neither the PX nor the PXL have ever been publically presented at any NAMM show yet.
Also, the last year was pretty busy with PX and PXL development and loads of firmware updates for older instruments.
-
If they're just on a small stage, they may be having some of their partner artists come up to show off the PX/L and make everyone there feel bad about their chops.
-
I build exhibitions/expos/trade shows/etc for a living/gas and I'm more trying to guess what the stand will look like from the floorplan! But then again, when I see coverage of shows/events I've not built on the telly I spend more time IDing the main show build company and trying to spot trademark stand designs of custom build companies. Unfortunately the only tradeshow here that comes close to anything like NAMM is the broadcast tech show....
That position Sequential have is a nice spot as not only will they will get traffic from everyone using ATM next to them (as Shaw pointed out), but as people exit the main show hall via the entry opposite they will hopefully see the stand, not to mention anyone who is visiting the Yamaha display will notice them. It does look like there is a set of fire stairs next to them, but the elevators are also (another traffic zone). I think I like my work a little bit too much sometimes ;)
-
Well, just one more day....
-
Well, just one more day....
Fingers crossed!
-
Trying to not get my hopes up (I'm one of those Poly-Pro2 guys (except 2 digital and 2 VCOs))
-
I would most like to see a replacement for the Prophet 12 - something big and fairly sophisticated.
-
I'm 99% certain, that the next product is either a PX module, or the P12's takeover...
-
That certainly would be to follow the usual pattern.
-
I don't expect the next instrument yet, at least not tomorrow. I suspect it'll be a booth where the PX and PXL are going to be presented, but obviously outside of where the regular booths are located (according to the floorplan).
-
Here are the news:
Sequential Debuts Eight New 8Dio Sample Packs for Prophet X at NAMM
"Anaheim, CA—Jan 23, 2019— At this year’s NAMM convention, Sequential will debut eight new add-on packs from sound developer 8Dio for their flagship samples-plus-synthesis keyboard, the Prophet X. The sample packs are focused largely on vintage synthesizers and include the Minimoog Model D, Sequential Circuits T8, Oberheim OBX, ARP 2600, Juno 60, Jupiter 6, Moog Prodigy, as well as a new deep-sampled piano.
The Prophet X has garnered critical acclaim for its sonic versatility and sound design capabilities through its substantial internal library of 150 GB of sample content as well as its ability to import up to 50 GB of additional user samples and add-on content from sound developers.
All sample content can be manipulated by the Prophet X sound engine, which powers two simultaneous sample-based instruments plus two high-resolution digital oscillators, with a full complement of traditional synthesis tools, all processed through analog filters. Dual digital effects and a 64-step polyphonic sequencer round out the package. In standard performance mode, the instrument provides bi-timbral, 8-voice stereo, or 16-voice mono operation. 32-voice performance mode, allows paraphonic filter operation when using a single sampled instrument and oscillator.
'I’m excited to introduce these new Prophet X add-ons from 8dio at NAMM,” commented Dave Smith. They add an interesting vintage slant to a very modern synth. To have these classic instruments available to perform with or to manipulate with the Prophet X synthesis engine makes an already-powerful musical tool even more versatile. '
Dave will be representing Sequential at the NAMM show at Meeting Room TKAB.
The add-ons packs will be available for download from 8Dio’s website at a date to be determined after the show.
Disclamer: All musical instrument manufacturer and product names used in add-on packs by 8Dio are trademarks of their respective owners, which are in no way associated or affiliated with 8Dio or Sequential LLC."
Taken from: https://www.matrixsynth.com/2019/01/sequential-debuts-eight-new-8dio-sample.html
-
Here are the news:
Sequential Debuts Eight New 8Dio Sample Packs for Prophet X at NAMM
"Anaheim, CA—Jan 23, 2019— At this year’s NAMM convention, Sequential will debut eight new add-on packs from sound developer 8Dio for their flagship samples-plus-synthesis keyboard, the Prophet X. The sample packs are focused largely on vintage synthesizers and include the Minimoog Model D, Sequential Circuits T8, Oberheim OBX, ARP 2600, Juno 60, Jupiter 6, Moog Prodigy, as well as a new deep-sampled piano.
The Prophet X has garnered critical acclaim for its sonic versatility and sound design capabilities through its substantial internal library of 150 GB of sample content as well as its ability to import up to 50 GB of additional user samples and add-on content from sound developers.
All sample content can be manipulated by the Prophet X sound engine, which powers two simultaneous sample-based instruments plus two high-resolution digital oscillators, with a full complement of traditional synthesis tools, all processed through analog filters. Dual digital effects and a 64-step polyphonic sequencer round out the package. In standard performance mode, the instrument provides bi-timbral, 8-voice stereo, or 16-voice mono operation. 32-voice performance mode, allows paraphonic filter operation when using a single sampled instrument and oscillator.
'I’m excited to introduce these new Prophet X add-ons from 8dio at NAMM,” commented Dave Smith. They add an interesting vintage slant to a very modern synth. To have these classic instruments available to perform with or to manipulate with the Prophet X synthesis engine makes an already-powerful musical tool even more versatile. '
Dave will be representing Sequential at the NAMM show at Meeting Room TKAB.
The add-ons packs will be available for download from 8Dio’s website at a date to be determined after the show.
Disclamer: All musical instrument manufacturer and product names used in add-on packs by 8Dio are trademarks of their respective owners, which are in no way associated or affiliated with 8Dio or Sequential LLC."
Taken from: https://www.matrixsynth.com/2019/01/sequential-debuts-eight-new-8dio-sample.html (https://www.matrixsynth.com/2019/01/sequential-debuts-eight-new-8dio-sample.html)
I'm quite looking forward to this. I got the Last Prophet Add-On pack, and those samples are a joy to work with -- they mix well with the onboard OSCs, and thick pads just fall out of the instrument.
-
I'm 99% certain, that the next product is either a PX module, or the P12's takeover...
A PX module seems to be off the table with a likelihood of 99% methinks.
-
I'm 99% certain, that the next product is either a PX module, or the P12's takeover...
A PX module seems to be off the table with a likelihood of 99% methinks.
I know the chances are not high... but it's either that, or a P12 takeover... the later being my best bet thus far. :)
-
I'm 99% certain, that the next product is either a PX module, or the P12's takeover...
A PX module seems to be off the table with a likelihood of 99% methinks.
That’s what essentially what Carson said in a Prophet X thread... which to me means that they have either been s-ending time around the office drinking (see those new 40th anniversary shot glasses), or working on something completely new. Or hopefully both.
-
I'm 99% certain, that the next product is either a PX module, or the P12's takeover...
A PX module seems to be off the table with a likelihood of 99% methinks.
That’s what essentially what Carson said in a Prophet X thread... which to me means that they have either been s-ending time around the office drinking (see those new 40th anniversary shot glasses), or working on something completely new. Or hopefully both.
I'm not so sure about that. 2018 was still pretty much dedicated to the PX and the PXL. After all, it wasn't announced before May. Then they had to design the hardware for the PXL while maintaining the first OS versions and developing the user sample import feature. During the 2nd half of last year they also released plenty of updates for other synths which included not only bug fixes but also significant enhancements like in the case of the Pro 2's software. That couldn't have left a lot of time to focus on what comes next, although they certainly know by now what is going to be the next project. But it will probably take a couple of more months until that's going to be announced. Personally, I wouldn't expect any news before summer, which I would still consider quick in case the next instrument would be something like a follow-up to the P12. If there would ever be anything like that, though, I would not expect it to be anything like a P12 Rev2, but rather something that's as related to the P12 as the P12 was to the Evolver.
-
I think we will likely see Sequential’s next synth announced around Superbooth or Knobcon or something. With things like the Peak, Quantum and even the Kyra and Microfreak perhaps Sequential is simply deciding what they should do in terms of a digital oscillator based synth that would be different or stand out from what’s already on the market.
-
I think we will likely see Sequential’s next synth announced around Superbooth or Knobcon or something. With things like the Peak, Quantum and even the Kyra and Microfreak perhaps Sequential is simply deciding what they should do in terms of a digital oscillator based synth that would be different or stand out from what’s already on the market.
Sequential has never really made its decisions dependent on market research or anything like that. So I would assume they already know what's next irrespective of the latest NAMM releases. I do agree insofar, though, as the analog craze seems to have reached a tipping point. Not in the sense that there's going to be another 1983 again (the current market is far too diverse by comparison and allows for a more sustained co-existence of different types), but insofar as more and more design approaches move into the hybrid territory: Hybrid in terms of analog and digital, but also in terms of synthesis options.
-
And therefore Sequential also has to take FPGA digital synthesis seriously now in my opinion... one of the things that all digital synths suffer from are aliasing, especially with the more exotic types of synthesis that involve audio rate modulations (and that's the actual fun digital synthesis, doing things analog cannot)... more and more of these digital synths are seeing the light of day in these times... Kyra and PEAK being examples of this.
More hardware synths working in FPGA would also make a big difference to all those "digital synth in software and hardware are essentially the same, so you can as well use softsynths" types of comments... if hardware synths start to utilize FPGA digital synthesis they will be able to outpower the softsynths, making an actual good reason to choose hardware over software... even when 100% digital.
-
And therefore Sequential also has to take FPGA digital synthesis seriously now in my opinion... one of the things that all digital synths suffer from are aliasing, especially with the more exotic types of synthesis that involve audio rate modulations (and that's the actual fun digital synthesis, doing things analog cannot)... more and more of these digital synths are seeing the light of day in these times... Kyra and PEAK being examples of this.
More hardware synths working in FPGA would also make a big difference to all those "digital synth in software and hardware are essentially the same, so you can as well use softsynths" types of comments... if hardware synths start to utilize FPGA digital synthesis they will be able to outpower the softsynths, making an actual good reason to choose hardware over software... even when 100% digital.
I'd like to see a function where you can dial in how much aliasing you want.
-
significant enhancements like in the case of the Pro 2's software.
I'd like major updates like linear FM for P12/Pro 2 not be the exception. The Montage for example has massive annual overhauls. Novation Peak just had tons of major features added. The Quantum isn't even a year old and a major addition is being added. Now the explanation given is that Sequential isn't a massive company like Yamaha, yet if you're releasing flagship 3 or even 4k synths, especially tech heavy ones like the PX, I would expect the same treatment being paid.
I want to see the P12 replacement as much as the next guy, but a model based around a yearly high-end release doesn't allow for any single product to reach its full potential.
-
significant enhancements like in the case of the Pro 2's software.
I'd like major updates like linear FM for P12/Pro 2 not be the exception. The Montage for example has massive annual overhauls. Novation Peak just had tons of major features added. The Quantum isn't even a year old and a major addition is being added. Now the explanation given is that Sequential isn't a massive company like Yamaha, yet if you're releasing flagship 3 or even 4k synths, especially tech heavy ones like the PX, I would expect the same treatment being paid.
I want to see the P12 replacement as much as the next guy, but a model based around a yearly high-end release doesn't allow for any single product to reach its full potential.
Well with the recent updates to the P6, OB6 and REV2...perhaps it's a sign where a certain team will be delegated to focusing on improving products in their catalog while others are focusing on the newest ones. Look how much they've grown since the days of the P12, Pro 2, Tempest and Mophox4.
-
I want to see the P12 replacement as much as the next guy, but a model based around a yearly high-end release doesn't allow for any single product to reach its full potential.
I completely agree. I would much rather see a moderate number of highly developed instruments that are substantially free of bugs. The yearly release is not nearly as important. It just keeps the company in the music news.
-
And fresh from NAMM (crossposted):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-zELjyoklA
https://youtu.be/ZU9I-7WfHBA
-
https://youtu.be/lGez_3jqgCI?t=566
Looks like whatever it is, we might see it by the summer...
-
https://youtu.be/lGez_3jqgCI?t=566
Looks like whatever it is, we might see it by the summer...
Oh happy day!
-
https://youtu.be/lGez_3jqgCI?t=566
Looks like whatever it is, we might see it by the summer...
Oh happy day!
I told you so. ;D
-
So we have one hint: it's nothing like a Prophet XL. Okay, let's try to work from there.
-
So we have one hint: it's nothing like a Prophet XL. Okay, let's try to work from there....
Not yet at least. Dave mentioned that the PX engine would be great for drums, but not right away.
-
So we have one hint: it's nothing like a Prophet XL. Okay, let's try to work from there....
And we have that sheepish grin from Dave -- like saying "it's gonna be a good one".
:)
-
Could we say a Poly Evolver Keyboard Rev2 is nothing like a PXL? Hmmm....
-
Could we say a Poly Evolver Keyboard Rev2 is nothing like a PXL? Hmmm....
Since there hasn't been anything like a PEK, I see no logical fallacy. ;)
-
Could we say a Poly Evolver Keyboard Rev2 is nothing like a PXL? Hmmm....
HA!
Yes you could. But I somehow think Dave will do something different. I mean, before the P12, who would have thought he would have created OSC types called "Meh", "Buzz" and "Shrill" -- and THEN allow the synth to smoothly morph among them. I think he may well head in a direction that could only come from his imagination, not ours.
-
I mean, before the P12, who would have thought he would have created OSC types called "Meh", "Buzz" and "Shrill" -- and THEN allow the synth to smoothly morph among them.
Each time I dial up the waveform "Meh" on my Pro 2, its name never fails to make me smirk.
-
One thing I hope is that it's color pallet is visually different. I really like the white P12 and the look of the Poly Evolver Keyboards simply because they aren't the typical black designs. Looking at the current Sequential catalog it would be nice to see something not just sonically different but visually different as well.
-
One thing I hope is that it's color pallet is visually different. I really like the white P12 and the look of the Poly Evolver Keyboards simply because they aren't the typical black designs. Looking at the current Sequential catalog it would be nice to see something not just sonically different but visually different as well.
Well, we had yellow already too. And since red is pretty much monopolized by a certain Swedish company, that would only leave green or some other mixed colors. Preferred name for a green synth: Sustainesizer.
-
One thing I hope is that it's color pallet is visually different. I really like the white P12 and the look of the Poly Evolver Keyboards simply because they aren't the typical black designs. Looking at the current Sequential catalog it would be nice to see something not just sonically different but visually different as well.
Well, we had yellow already too. And since red is pretty much monopolized by a certain Swedish company, that would only leave green or some other mixed colors. Preferred name for a green synth: Sustainesizer.
Well white, blue, purple would all be welcome....green....hmmm...despite it being my favorite color I'm not sure if it would work for a synth....maybe green LEDs though...that would be different. Pair it with the red LEDs of the P6 and it would be Christmas time all year round lol.
-
One thing I hope is that it's color pallet is visually different. I really like the white P12 and the look of the Poly Evolver Keyboards simply because they aren't the typical black designs. Looking at the current Sequential catalog it would be nice to see something not just sonically different but visually different as well.
Well, we had yellow already too. And since red is pretty much monopolized by a certain Swedish company, that would only leave green or some other mixed colors. Preferred name for a green synth: Sustainesizer.
Well white, blue, purple would all be welcome....green....hmmm...despite it being my favorite color I'm not sure if it would work for a synth....maybe green LEDs though...that would be different. Pair it with the red LEDs of the P6 and it would be Christmas time all year round lol.
Ah, now I wanna call the Globals button on my Prophet-6 the Christmas button.
-
The PEK is one of the best-looking keyboards I've seen, so I'd love to see that scheme make a reappearance. Plus Sequential has already had a couple of blue-accented keyboards in its past (VS and 2000), so there's precedence in the Sequential livery.
-
It won't happen...but what I'd love to see as a possible smaller synth down the line.
Sequential-Vox.
A four voice paraphonic analog string machine/vocoder.
Both mic and guitar input.
Reverb, Phaser, Chorus and Delay built in as effects with a new Ensemble effect.
I don't believe Sequential ever had a string machine/vocoder. I could be wrong though...still...I think it would be quite unique in their catalog. I know Waldorf and Behringer are coming out with their respective vocoders/string machines but it would be nice to see what Sequential could do with the idea. Not too many paraphonic synths on the market and that's a shame, I really think they have a unique sound to them.
-
It won't happen...but what I'd love to see as a possible smaller synth down the line.
Sequential-Vox.
A four voice paraphonic analog string machine/vocoder.
Both mic and guitar input.
Reverb, Phaser, Chorus and Delay built in as effects with a new Ensemble effect.
I don't believe Sequential ever had a string machine/vocoder. I could be wrong though...still...I think it would be quite unique in their catalog. I know Waldorf and Behringer are coming out with their respective vocoders/string machines but it would be nice to see what Sequential could do with the idea. Not too many paraphonic synths on the market and that's a shame, I really think they have a unique sound to them.
I think that would be a bit too retro for Dave's liking. And while Sequential offers many different idiosyncratic machines, each with its own strengths, a string machine/vocoder seems a bit too specialized for what they usually do.
-
Dave is using his usual "new" and "different" terminology, so I'd say our guesses are in vain.
-
One thing I hope is that it's color pallet is visually different. I really like the white P12 and the look of the Poly Evolver Keyboards simply because they aren't the typical black designs. Looking at the current Sequential catalog it would be nice to see something not just sonically different but visually different as well.
Ah the colour discussion, not as trivial as some think!
Well, we had yellow already too. And since red is pretty much monopolized by a certain Swedish company, that would only leave green or some other mixed colors. Preferred name for a green synth: Sustainesizer.
I like this idea. I have no green in my room yet besides the lettering on the Pulse 2 and Mod-1, both being from one of the most colourful companies there has been over the years but still black and white body colours respectively.
Well white, blue, purple would all be welcome....green....hmmm...despite it being my favorite color I'm not sure if it would work for a synth....maybe green LEDs though...that would be different. Pair it with the red LEDs of the P6 and it would be Christmas time all year round lol.
It is mine also! But maybe yellow flashing lights for less eye damage in the dark. Deep Forest* Green with yellow blinkies and an oled screen would make for a nice looking machine, though dead sure the traditional ebony and ivory's under it would never match it well.
It won't happen...but what I'd love to see as a possible smaller synth down the line.
Sequential-Vox.
No, please no more of these things that seem more abundant now that they ever were in the 70's or 80's! I can't imagine there's enough room in the market for another with at least four companies making them now. Good string are always welcome, but not another devoted string machine in the vein of those from the days of yore.
Dave is using his usual "new" and "different" terminology, so I'd say our guesses are in vain.
Now, in keeping with what you/we've all been discussing elsewhere, a synth inline with the current ProX but with perhaps something akin to the SM Pro VMachine (and others) in there also. I like the idea of user samples and a sophisticated manipulation engine and the Prologue really piqued my curiosity with the 3rd party Osc's being programmed for it. Combine those to features and all that is really needed is the ability to load plug-in effects onto the synth also. The synth could come with bare-bones and an option for adding sample sets, Osc models and effects packs for either a one-time "for life" payment, or use the subscription model where an owner can pay for the rights to use the "add-ons" from particular companies for a period of time (a la the business software package model used these days).
This could make for a product that Sequential could continue to produce for many years longer than what is the current popular flagship lifespans while still ensuring a steady flow of revenue other than relying on the sales of hardware.
I'm probably way off the mark on if this is a viable business model for an instrument company (one product rarely sustains a company no matter how good it is) or if it's even a reasonable idea for a synthesiser that people entertain buying then purchasing the add-ons.....but it's a thread for musings.
*Yes, you know what I'm talking about!
-
Wait there’s four companies making string machines? I only know Waldorf and Behringer are.
And honestly even if string machines aren’t your thing I do think there’s room for paraphonic synths (I think they have quite a unique sound to them) and especially vocoders. The Pro 2 has an external audio input, would it really be so bad if a vocoder was at least an option.
-
Also Roland with their VP-03 and I counted the Mininova because of it's gooseneck mic without thinking it's actually a VA with a vocoder really.
I have a Streichfett and actually am annoyed that Waldorf won't be doing their STVC in a module. I also think that there is room for a few more paraphonic synths. I was fairly critical of them before I got a Pulse 2 and found it's paraphonic modes killer chord makers even sharing the one filter and amp. I used to treat the Evolver in a similar manner by sequencing it's osc's to play chords.
-
or use the subscription model where an owner can pay for the rights to use the "add-ons" from particular companies for a period of time (a la the business software package model used these days).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSudkID3zJM
-
Also Roland with their VP-03 and I counted the Mininova because of it's gooseneck mic without thinking it's actually a VA with a vocoder really.
I have a Streichfett and actually am annoyed that Waldorf won't be doing their STVC in a module. I also think that there is room for a few more paraphonic synths. I was fairly critical of them before I got a Pulse 2 and found it's paraphonic modes killer chord makers even sharing the one filter and amp. I used to treat the Evolver in a similar manner by sequencing it's osc's to play chords.
Roland discontinued the VP 03 and the mini Nova is certainly not a dedicated string machine/vocoder
-
It's very simple. If it isn't blue, it isn't an Evolver. It won't sound the same, and it can't ever sound the same. An Evolver sounds blue, for blue is its sound.
-
Wait there’s four companies making string machines? I only know Waldorf and Behringer are.
And honestly even if string machines aren’t your thing I do think there’s room for paraphonic synths (I think they have quite a unique sound to them) and especially vocoders. The Pro 2 has an external audio input, would it really be so bad if a vocoder was at least an option.
I too, have a special little place in my heart for string machines. Every time I listen to one online, I think, "Goodness gracious, that sounds dreadful!" The old stringers need to be processed correctly. With the right amount of EQ and reverb, and for certain contexts a phaser as well, they can sound wonderful. I had an Elka Rhapasody 490 many moons ago, and used it constantly. They add a certain magic to a mix, different from the imitations I've attempted with my DSI synthesizers. I have a feeling Dave's instruments are too good to be able to perfectly imitate them.
-
I have a feeling Dave's instruments are too good to be able to perfectly imitate them.
Blasphemy!
-
I have a feeling Dave's instruments are too good to be able to perfectly imitate them.
Blasphemy!
I've tried and tried, even using two different simultaneous LFO rates for the vibrato. The DSI version is just too lovely.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOWT9yshJuQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRRY6zt_a7g
-
Wait there’s four companies making string machines? I only know Waldorf and Behringer are.
And honestly even if string machines aren’t your thing I do think there’s room for paraphonic synths (I think they have quite a unique sound to them) and especially vocoders. The Pro 2 has an external audio input, would it really be so bad if a vocoder was at least an option.
I too, have a special little place in my heart for string machines. Every time I listen to one online, I think, "Goodness gracious, that sounds dreadful!" The old stringers need to be processed correctly. With the right amount of EQ and reverb, and for certain contexts a phaser as well, they can sound wonderful. I had an Elka Rhapasody 490 many moons ago, and used it constantly. They add a certain magic to a mix, different from the imitations I've attempted with my DSI synthesizers. I have a feeling Dave's instruments are too good to be able to perfectly imitate them.
The key is the paraphonic nature and the divide down technology used.
https://youtu.be/RsSRuVanfek
-
Yes, the paraphonic envelope is one of the keys. But once you're sustaining a note or chord, it's all the same.
That audio quality is terrible. Why would Behringer post a demonstration that sounds like a Farfisa organ on a bad day? And there's a steep price to pay for making the instrument "portable." You could somewhat compensate for a string machine's inherent thinness of tone by maintaining a bass note, but not with Behringer's tiny tot version.
-
tiny tot version.
That's my new favorite phrase for the Roland / Yamaha / Behringer mini-toys
-
Yes, the paraphonic envelope is one of the keys. But once you're sustaining a note or chord, it's all the same.
That audio quality is terrible. Why would Behringer post a demonstration that sounds like a Farfisa organ on a bad day? And there's a steep price to pay for making the instrument "portable." You could somewhat compensate for a string machine's inherent thinness of tone by maintaining a bass note, but not with Behringer's tiny tot version.
Well you could do that with an external midi controller. I know it's not ideal but realistically I think Behringer knows it's a niche product even among synth heads so making a 5 octave version isn't economically realistic.
Shame that I won't buy a Behringer product, I actually like the sound of it.
-
I do wonder though...will Sequential do yet another Prophet or will it be a totally different name?
-
Yes, the paraphonic envelope is one of the keys. But once you're sustaining a note or chord, it's all the same.
That audio quality is terrible. Why would Behringer post a demonstration that sounds like a Farfisa organ on a bad day? And there's a steep price to pay for making the instrument "portable." You could somewhat compensate for a string machine's inherent thinness of tone by maintaining a bass note, but not with Behringer's tiny tot version.
Well you could do that with an external midi controller. I know it's not ideal but realistically I think Behringer knows it's a niche product even among synth heads so making a 5 octave version isn't economically realistic.
Shame that I won't buy a Behringer product, I actually like the sound of it.
Well, unless you need it live, there are some decent software [gasp!] emulations [sorry for uttering the S word]. And in a mix, you likely can’t tell a difference.
-
I know it's not ideal but realistically I think Behringer knows it's a niche product even among synth heads so making a 5 octave version isn't economically realistic.
As I'm sure you know, the common keyboard length of the old string machines was four octaves. Even that would have sufficed for so limited an instrument. But three? In the opinion of many of us, that's too short even for a mono synth.
-
I know it's not ideal but realistically I think Behringer knows it's a niche product even among synth heads so making a 5 octave version isn't economically realistic.
As I'm sure you know, the common keyboard length of the old string machines was four octaves. Even that would have sufficed for so limited an instrument. But three? In the opinion of many of us, that's too short even for a mono synth.
Indeed. Now I’ve tasted the Pro 2, the Sub 37 seems annoyingly short. Arturia did it right with Matrixbrute at four octaves.
-
I know it's not ideal but realistically I think Behringer knows it's a niche product even among synth heads so making a 5 octave version isn't economically realistic.
As I'm sure you know, the common keyboard length of the old string machines was four octaves. Even that would have sufficed for so limited an instrument. But three? In the opinion of many of us, that's too short even for a mono synth.
Nah I disagree with that mono statement. I see no reason to have so many octaves when you can only play one note at a time. Zero real estate sense.
-
I know it's not ideal but realistically I think Behringer knows it's a niche product even among synth heads so making a 5 octave version isn't economically realistic.
As I'm sure you know, the common keyboard length of the old string machines was four octaves. Even that would have sufficed for so limited an instrument. But three? In the opinion of many of us, that's too short even for a mono synth.
Indeed. Now I’ve tasted the Pro 2, the Sub 37 seems annoyingly short. Arturia did it right with Matrixbrute at four octaves.
Pro 2 has the ability to play four voices paraphonically. The keyboard range makes sense. Thr Matrix Brute can play three note paraphonically and split the keyboard. Plus it also had to fit the actual Matrix.
Since you can only play 2 notes paraphonically on the Sub 37 it would not make sense to have more octaves. Form follows function.
-
I know it's not ideal but realistically I think Behringer knows it's a niche product even among synth heads so making a 5 octave version isn't economically realistic.
As I'm sure you know, the common keyboard length of the old string machines was four octaves. Even that would have sufficed for so limited an instrument. But three? In the opinion of many of us, that's too short even for a mono synth.
Nah I disagree with that mono statement. I see no reason to have so many octaves when you can only play one note at a time. Zero real estate sense.
What about melodies that exceed three octaves? Mine do all the time. There are often no opportunities to hit an octave button. What then? Even another half-an-octave would be a major improvement, as with the Pro 2 or Minimoog. Whereas, my dear old Mono Evolver Keyboard was a constant problem for melodies, and I had to sell it for the big one.
Believe me, if three octaves sufficed, then I could happily afford one of the current mono synths. But they just won't do. I've owned six different three-octave mono synths, and each time I had problems with their size. That's a practical fact. Otherwise, there would have been a Sub 37 or Odyssey sitting in my music room long ago.
It's not without good reason that mono synths have been made over the years in all different shapes and sizes, so as to suit the needs of different types of synthesists.
-
I know it's not ideal but realistically I think Behringer knows it's a niche product even among synth heads so making a 5 octave version isn't economically realistic.
As I'm sure you know, the common keyboard length of the old string machines was four octaves. Even that would have sufficed for so limited an instrument. But three? In the opinion of many of us, that's too short even for a mono synth.
Indeed. Now I’ve tasted the Pro 2, the Sub 37 seems annoyingly short. Arturia did it right with Matrixbrute at four octaves.
Pro 2 has the ability to play four voices paraphonically. The keyboard range makes sense. Thr Matrix Brute can play three note paraphonically and split the keyboard. Plus it also had to fit the actual Matrix.
Since you can only play 2 notes paraphonically on the Sub 37 it would not make sense to have more octaves. Form follows function.
I find it much easier to physically jump up octaves rather than constantly having to use the transpose knob. It also frees up a hand to use the pitch and mod wheels instead.
I wrote a line in Bbm the other day that spans a full 3 octaves; it’s playable on the Pro 2 but not on the Subsequent 37. It has fast 16ths in it so using the transpose keys isn’t viable.
-
I find it much easier to physically jump up octaves rather than constantly having to use the transpose knob. It also frees up a hand to use the pitch and mod wheels instead.
I wrote a line in Bbm the other day that spans a full 3 octaves; it’s playable on the Pro 2 but not on the Subsequent 37. It has fast 16ths in it so using the transpose keys isn’t viable.
Yup. And add the many cases when you're left hand is playing another instrument, so that it's not free to hit the octave button on your mono synth. This is less of a problem if you're always multi-tracking, but that's not the case with those of us who record or play live.
-
or use the subscription model where an owner can pay for the rights to use the "add-ons" from particular companies for a period of time (a la the business software package model used these days).
[a video I didn't watch due to it's title making playback essentially a redundancy measure]
Yes yes, I agree it's a dreadful concept and I'd not like the model to infiltrate the music world in the same way it has the visual creative world, but it was purely a throwaway idea.
-
Also Roland with their VP-03 and I counted the Mininova because of it's gooseneck mic without thinking it's actually a VA with a vocoder really.
I have a Streichfett and actually am annoyed that Waldorf won't be doing their STVC in a module. I also think that there is room for a few more paraphonic synths. I was fairly critical of them before I got a Pulse 2 and found it's paraphonic modes killer chord makers even sharing the one filter and amp. I used to treat the Evolver in a similar manner by sequencing it's osc's to play chords.
Roland discontinued the VP 03 and the mini Nova is certainly not a dedicated string machine/vocoder
Didn't realise that Roland dropped the module. Didn't last long really. I thought it sounded rather nice for a recent times Roland and was sorta jealous of the vocoder. Roland are getting better and better at digitally cloning their 80's synths.
And yeah, I did mention that the Mininova's vocoder made me just kneejerk it into the list and I'm aware it's a VA as it's namesake was.
To add to all the talk of octave counts: transpose buttons are why I want everything in a module. That way I can use my own choice of controller and not pay for keyboards too short for the instrument they are on.
I'd like to get an authentic octave-divider string machine. That dreamy ethereal sound they have can evoke so much emotion from a single chord held for bars on end. The Streichfett is nice but it's not quite it. I asked Waldorf about a STVC module and they said their intended market for the STVC doesn't want a module. But I've got a usable five octave synth with a wonderfully unique orange skin that would be perfect for it already.
-
I find it much easier to physically jump up octaves rather than constantly having to use the transpose knob. It also frees up a hand to use the pitch and mod wheels instead.
I wrote a line in Bbm the other day that spans a full 3 octaves; it’s playable on the Pro 2 but not on the Subsequent 37. It has fast 16ths in it so using the transpose keys isn’t viable.
Yup. And add the many cases when you're left hand is playing another instrument, so that it's not free to hit the octave button on your mono synth. This is less of a problem if you're always multi-tracking, but that's not the case with those of us who record or play live.
Didn’t seem to hinder Keith Emerson or Herbie Hancock playing Minimoogs and Odysseys. Lol
It is a rather strange conundrum to be in though. “I need more octaves” “use an external controller via midi” “no” lol
-
I stand corrected...Sequential did have a string synth back in the day.
http://www.vintagesynth.com/sci/prelude.php
-
I would like to see one based on an FPGA running very high rate oscillators like what Novation does with the Peak.
A modern 16 voice FPGA 24mhz zero alias oscillators based synth with Analog path and it would open up more oscillator types,modulation etc. Novation Peak is quite an instrument because of this and would love to see what DSI can do with such an processor.
-
I would like to see one based on an FPGA running very high rate oscillators like what Novation does with the Peak.
A modern 16 voice FPGA 24mhz zero alias oscillators based synth with Analog path and it would open up more oscillator types,modulation etc. Novation Peak is quite an instrument because of this and would love to see what DSI can do with such an processor.
Just as long as their is a parameter which allows the user to dial in as little or as much aliasing as they want.
-
Whatever it is, I hope it has better pots than the current models. I returned my Pro 2 after the pots became loose after a few weeks. The problem seems not to be the point where they attach to the board but the rotating top section of the pot (the part to which the rubber knobs attach); this part becomes loose and rocks from side to side.
I am looking to buy a poly and spent a few hours playing a P-6, an OB-6 and a Rev 2 and all three had loose pots (OB-6 having the fewest). I know these are floor models and thus potentially subject to abuse but still. I would like my gear to last a long time.
-
I do wonder if this new synth will have an entirely digital front end or have a combination of two analog and two digital oscillators like the Poly Evolver. I would think putting analog oscillators on it would start to overlap with their other analog oscillator based synths in their catalog.
-
Fully MPE compatible for the new midi controllers on the market would be nice. Ability to import waveforms. And most importantly, how about another blue color one like PEK? Something to set it apart form the poly market offerings.
-
Fully MPE compatible for the new midi controllers on the market would be nice. Ability to import waveforms. And most importantly, how about another blue color one like PEK? Something to set it apart form the poly market offerings.
Or white! I tried a white P12 in the store the other week and I really liked the look of it.
-
I hope it has an all digital front end with SSI2144 filters. If so I've already started saving up for it.
Also I'd prefer it to be white with blue print/lights.
-
I hope it has an all digital front end with SSI2144 filters. If so I've already started saving up for it.
Also I'd prefer it to be white with blue print/lights.
I've always associated wavetables/VS synthesis with the color Blue because of the Prophet VS, Poly Evolver and PPG Wave. Much like how I associate FM synthesis with the color Green (Because of the DX7)
I actually think either a white or blue synth would be a nice addition to Sequential's catalog. It would certainly make it unique.
The question really is....will it be another Prophet or will we see a totally new Sequential synth name? The Sequential Waves? The Sequential Vector?
-
Not sure if that's anything to go by but the Pro 2 got a $500 price drop at Sweetwater: https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/Pro2--dave-smith-instruments-pro-2
-
Not sure if that's anything to go by but the Pro 2 got a $500 price drop at Sweetwater: https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/Pro2--dave-smith-instruments-pro-2
Pro 4 baby! Woooo
-
Not sure if that's anything to go by but the Pro 2 got a $500 price drop at Sweetwater: https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/Pro2--dave-smith-instruments-pro-2
"Limited-time Offer!
25% Off Plus Free Carry Bag and DSM03 Module!"
It sounds as if they're trying hard to move them out.
-
I do wonder if Sequential will officially buy Oberhiem and do turn some of Tom’s unreleased SEM X Eurorack stuff into reality....or The Son Of 4 Voice. Not sure if Dave and co. Have a big enough operation to handle both but still...hate to see those designs fade away.
https://www.matrixsynth.com/2011/01/tom-oberheim-son-of-4-voice.html
https://www.gearnews.com/namm-2017-oberheim-announce-eurorack-sem-x/
I did read though on a forum that someone asked Tom about the SEM X and Eurorack stuff and he apparently told them they will be released in 2019. I truly wish that to be true.
-
I did read though on a forum that someone asked Tom about the SEM X and Eurorack stuff and he apparently told them they will be released in 2019. I truly wish that to be true.
THAT would drag me [kicking and screaming] into the world of EuroCrack. The Sem Pro almost did....
-
With the Novation Summit set to arrive...I wonder if Sequential might change their plans for a P12 successor or somehow manage to simply bring out a better product to compete with the Summit. Both would likely be a digital oscillator/analog filter combination with bi timbrality and on board Effects. Both would likely have wavetables and FM in their digital front end. Makes one wonder if Sequential might do something completely unexpected and scrap their plans for a P12 successor because of this.
-
It will probably be a digital replacement for the P12... with the SUMMIT coming, it really will be hard to choose a P12 over the SUMMIT... SUMMIT more or less has the options that made the P12 attractive over the PEAK, and with a superior audio quality.
My bet is that if Sequential do not take MHz rate FPGA synthesis serious, they will sack behind at some point... so I hope for their own sake that they start taking that serious for future digital front end synthesizers.
But there are a few other possible things that the next synth could be... Dave has mentioned that it could be fun to use the sampling technology to create some sort of percussion device, so that is a sign it may be something in that direction too... TEMPEST certainly needs a successor as well, with a much better MIDI implementation and digital front end.
If it's not any of those two options, I really do not know what it would be, unless it's a module version of the Prophet X.
-
It will probably be a digital replacement for the P12... with the SUMMIT coming, it really will be hard to choose a P12 over the SUMMIT... SUMMIT more or less has the options that made the P12 attractive over the PEAK, and with a superior audio quality.
My bet is that if Sequential do not take MHz rate FPGA synthesis serious, they will sack behind at some point... so I hope for their own sake that they start taking that serious for future digital front end synthesizers.
But there are a few other possible things that the next synth could be... Dave has mentioned that it could be fun to use the sampling technology to create some sort of percussion device, so that is a sign it may be something in that direction too... TEMPEST certainly needs a successor as well, with a much better MIDI implementation and digital front end.
If it's not any of those two options, I really do not know what it would be, unless it's a module version of the Prophet X.
Well he said they aren’t working on a PX style percussion yet so I don’t think it’s that. I do think though they were working on something FPGA for their P12 replacement so it will be interesting to see if they hold off to see what the Summit has to offer and then try and better it.
-
It will probably be a digital replacement for the P12... with the SUMMIT coming, it really will be hard to choose a P12 over the SUMMIT... SUMMIT more or less has the options that made the P12 attractive over the PEAK, and with a superior audio quality.
My bet is that if Sequential do not take MHz rate FPGA synthesis serious, they will sack behind at some point... so I hope for their own sake that they start taking that serious for future digital front end synthesizers.
But there are a few other possible things that the next synth could be... Dave has mentioned that it could be fun to use the sampling technology to create some sort of percussion device, so that is a sign it may be something in that direction too... TEMPEST certainly needs a successor as well, with a much better MIDI implementation and digital front end.
If it's not any of those two options, I really do not know what it would be, unless it's a module version of the Prophet X.
Well he said they aren’t working on a PX style percussion yet so I don’t think it’s that. I do think though they were working on something FPGA for their P12 replacement so it will be interesting to see if they hold off to see what the Summit has to offer and then try and better it.
Correct. Dave just stated in a conversation with Nick from Sonicstate that some sort of drum machine based on sampling technology would certainly be a great idea, but quickly added that this is not what they're currently working on.
And while the Sequential team might certainly be receptive to what's going on, I very much doubt that they would revisit an already started design process according to daily announcements from the synth world.
-
One thing I'd like to see from Sequential now is a replacement of the P12
The new filters in the PX scream to be used in another type of digital front end kind of synth... Personally I'd like to see an FPGA digital front end, that has more than just the oscillators in the FPGA... I like the idear of the analog filters, but they are only LP, so if they instead included some unique digital filters in the FPGA it would become rather interesting, plus more ways to modulate between the oscillators than just the usual sync, ringmod and FM... I'd like to see some filter types that are rare in the analog domain like formant filters, waveshapers and other fun stuff that will allow you to get a really huge timbral range before the conversion to analog. I also hope for FX where the reverb has more modulation options than the current synth range... preferably I'd also like it to sport 4 oscillators so that the synth could have a built in joystick for Prophet VS type of performance where you can mix between the four waveforms (or other parameters) using the joystick.
Also... I'd like waveform storage like it was on the Evolver... with todays huge amount of memory for cheap, it should be possible to make a huge waveform bank with say; 4096 single cycle waveforms that you could upload yourself via SysEx, and then use these for both oscillator waveforms and LFO waveforms.... I'm thinking that the wavetables could be done a bit like it was on the P12 where you chose a left/middle/right waveshape, but just expand this to 5 waveforms instead that you can morph in between... this is what I miss on the PEAK because the wavetables are ROM shapes, not RAM which would greatly expand on the sonic pallette.
All in all I'd like to see a more wavetable oriented hybrid synth from Sequential.. .especially with FPGA for the digital part, with a joystick to use as performance controller.
-
Whatever they build, I hope they use better quality pot shafts. It’s shocking how quickly they deteriorate and this has been a major factor in my not buying a DSI/Sequential poly as of yet.
Summit is looking like a definite contender.
-
You know, with the current digital front/analog filter hybrids that have come out of Superbooth this year, I almost want to see Sequential not do one. As nice as a P12 successor would be it feels like it might get lost in the shuffle. Sequential always seems to sort of be ahead of the market or almost leading the market in a way but doing something so similar to the Summit or even the Super 6 would have less impact I feel, regardless of how many features they put into it.
-
You know, with the current digital front/analog filter hybrids that have come out of Superbooth this year, I almost want to see Sequential not do one. As nice as a P12 successor would be it feels like it might get lost in the shuffle. Sequential always seems to sort of be ahead of the market or almost leading the market in a way but doing something so similar to the Summit or even the Super 6 would have less impact I feel, regardless of how many features they put into it.
Well... whatver they have been working on for some time now, they probably cannot turn around, so it may be a replacement afterall... we'll just have to wait and see...
-
You know, with the current digital front/analog filter hybrids that have come out of Superbooth this year, I almost want to see Sequential not do one. As nice as a P12 successor would be it feels like it might get lost in the shuffle. Sequential always seems to sort of be ahead of the market or almost leading the market in a way but doing something so similar to the Summit or even the Super 6 would have less impact I feel, regardless of how many features they put into it.
Well... whatver they have been working on for some time now, they probably cannot turn around, so it may be a replacement afterall... we'll just have to wait and see...
Yeah I suppose...still...they haven’t really given themselves an official deadline or any official announcement. They didn’t debut anything at Namm or Superbooth or anything this year so it could very well be pushed back to next year before we see anything new with Sequential.
-
(https://scontent-frt3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/60332992_2523395351018647_112545658031833088_n.jpg?_nc_cat=100&_nc_ht=scontent-frt3-1.xx&oh=6b5db4cf86f9006403dbc6ed467fba21&oe=5D62F0CA)
-
(https://scontent-frt3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/60332992_2523395351018647_112545658031833088_n.jpg?_nc_cat=100&_nc_ht=scontent-frt3-1.xx&oh=6b5db4cf86f9006403dbc6ed467fba21&oe=5D62F0CA)
Is this from a blog post, or....?
-
Is this from a blog post, or....?
Facebook and Twitter. The Pro 2 has now officially been retired.
-
Is this from a blog post, or....?
Facebook and Twitter. The Pro 2 has now officially been retired.
We kinda saw that coming... and that raises some questions -- 2 synths retired before a replacement is announced for either. That's gonna drive some speculation for sure!
:)
-
Is this from a blog post, or....?
Facebook and Twitter. The Pro 2 has now officially been retired.
We kinda saw that coming... and that raises some questions -- 2 synths retired before a replacement is announced for either. That's gonna drive some speculation for sure!
:)
Either way, the Pro 2 is destined to remain a modern classic
-
Is this from a blog post, or....?
Facebook and Twitter. The Pro 2 has now officially been retired.
We kinda saw that coming... and that raises some questions -- 2 synths retired before a replacement is announced for either. That's gonna drive some speculation for sure!
:)
Either way, the Pro 2 is destined to remain a modern classic
No doubt.
-
Holy crap! Did not expect the Prophet 12, Pro 2 And the DSI Modular stuff to be discontinued all one after another in the same year. Hmm wonder if they read my post about the Pro 4 idea like they read my Prophet X post. ;)
-
Holy crap! Did not expect the Prophet 12, Pro 2 And the DSI Modular stuff to be discontinued all one after another in the same year. Hmm wonder if they read my post about the Pro 4 idea like they read my Prophet X post. ;)
Imagine a 5-octave, FPGA poly version of the Pro 2. I’d buy it in a heartbeat.
-
Holy crap! Did not expect the Prophet 12, Pro 2 And the DSI Modular stuff to be discontinued all one after another in the same year. Hmm wonder if they read my post about the Pro 4 idea like they read my Prophet X post. ;)
Imagine a 5-octave, FPGA poly version of the Pro 2. I’d buy it in a heartbeat.
Nah. I see zero logic in a five octave mono synth. Paraphonic or otherwise.
-
It's just another cue that something with a digital front end is coming up... They are rewamping their digital lineup, except the X... I'm certain of it... Hope it will be an FPGA front end, and please... No monosynth!... I wonder if the P12 will remain in module form still...
-
It's just another cue that something with a digital front end is coming up... They are rewamping their digital lineup, except the X... I'm certain of it... Hope it will be an FPGA front end, and please... No monosynth!... I wonder if the P12 will remain in module form still...
Or it may be something completely unexpected. While we are all expecting a P12 successor, we might get an analog oscillator/digital oscillator hybrid OR a larger VCO based synth that isn’t Moog One style pricing. With the Super 6 And Novation Summit, Sequential might feel the market for digital front/analog back synths are satisfied. Dave has always been about leading the market or doing something no one else is doing. He might not see a point in bringing out a synth with wavetables, FM, FPGA oscillators now when people already have access to one at a decent price. Likely why he never brought out an analog mono synth when everyone else was.
-
It's just another cue that something with a digital front end is coming up... They are rewamping their digital lineup, except the X... I'm certain of it... Hope it will be an FPGA front end, and please... No monosynth!... I wonder if the P12 will remain in module form still...
Or it may be something completely unexpected. While we are all expecting a P12 successor, we might get an analog oscillator/digital oscillator hybrid OR a larger VCO based synth that isn’t Moog One style pricing. With the Super 6 And Novation Summit, Sequential might feel the market for digital front/analog back synths are satisfied. Dave has always been about leading the market or doing something no one else is doing. He might not see a point in bringing out a synth with wavetables, FM, FPGA oscillators now when people already have access to one at a decent price. Likely why he never brought out an analog mono synth when everyone else was.
Well... if not something with a digital front end, then what? ... there is no other choice but to make the front end either digital or analog, and as FPGA will work for any kind of digital innovation, I could easily see this coming...
Now I'm not interested in just a P12 made with an FPGA front end if that is what you thought that I wanted... digital is the most flexible, and you could do anything with it at lightning FPGA speeds, so anything could be done, not just wavetable/VA stuff...
I still believe we'll see a new take on a digital front-end synth from Sequential because their whole lineup right now has an open space for such a device... but I certainly cannot guess what It'll be... just have to wait and see.
If it's a hybrid like the Evolver, fine with me... as long as it's FPGA in the digital front end, has at least 8voice polyphony, is at least dual timbral and has internal FX.
-
The market is full of analog, so that's not going against the grain in any way. Korg has a VCO/digital oscillator lineup, which I'm sure Dave and co could outdo, though that's not too interesting either. A knobby FM synth would certainly be something no one has ever really pulled off before. Nor are there any good examples of knobby physical modeling synths. The Quantum is capable of both in some way, but not focused around either. The Nonlinear Labs C15 is another interesting synth, yet it's not knobby.
-
The market is full of analog, so that's not going against the grain in any way. Korg has a VCO/digital oscillator lineup, which I'm sure Dave and co could outdo, though that's not too interesting either. A knobby FM synth would certainly be something no one has ever really pulled off before. Nor are there any good examples of knobby physical modeling synths. The Quantum is capable of both in some way, but not focused around either. The Nonlinear Labs C15 is another interesting synth, yet it's not knobby.
I was thinking a Prophet FM type synth with a focus on DX style FM synthesis but not sure.
Dave first did an analog/digital oscillator synth with the Evolver line.
Actually four part multitimbrality would be interesting with an analog/digital oscillator based synth. Right now the most Seqential has is two parts. Moog One has three....why not four?
-
As far as another VCO based synth from Sequential....maybe something like Paul Dither’s Prophet 8 design which is an extension of the Prophet 6 design ....or perhaps Prophet 20 with an external lower manual extension (instead of a module) like the Prophet 10. So you essentially could get two 10 voice VCO synths at your disposal with two key beds. We don’t really have a large analog flagship from Sequential.
Perhaps something with multitimbrality. Dave did say they are looking into that as well as MPE.
-
Dave first did an analog/digital oscillator synth with the Evolver line.
Actually four part multitimbrality would be interesting with an analog/digital oscillator based synth. Right now the most Seqential has is two parts. Moog One has three....why not four?
It doesn't matter who did it first, it's about what's currently on the market. Nor is a more modern version of something you did prior all that innovative and possibly not even fresh anyway. Same goes for simply adding more stuff. I'd like to see Dave do at least one more synth that no one had ever really attempted.
-
The reason no one does multitimbrality anymore is that people making music is getting used to recording audio with their synths... they like to be able to record as many tracks as they want with audio from the same synth, thus needing less physical synths... i bet this is why multitimbrality is phasing out with many companies.
The main reason for some being dual or even a third layer is that performing musicians need stacks/splits and thus more than 3 would be more or less useless. multimode in many of these synths is a simple bonus where you can control the layers independently via their own MIDI channel, and code wise it's pretty easy to include when you've already got stack/split functionality.
A third reason may be that any synth with analog parts in the signal chain is always limited to about 8-16 voices ... if you had 4 parts on a REV2 16-voice you'd be down to 4 voices per part... we're reaching a polyphony that's becoming insufficient for anything but leads, basses and other short release sounds now, and when you use multitimbral you all know that the first question will be "does it have separate outs!?" which further increase the cost of the synth, and complicates any built in FX that will usually be routed to only one output, otherwise the FX engine have to be duplicated for each output as well, further increasing cost.
With a fully digital synth, it's much more feasible to have multitimbrality, especially these days with the horsepower the CPU's give you... probably also why the KYRA have 8 part multitimbrality... it also has 128 voices giving you 16 voices per part because of this.
-
Here's another idea that no one has ever done:
(https://media.sweetwater.com/api/i/q-82__ha-ef8f171d6b3d516a__hmac-a8c6f5f01563dac7ac069226d346381c0e20f68e/images/items/750/KB37w-large.jpg)
A module keyboard platform like the KB Waldorf except one that works within a digitally controlled ecosystem. Meaning it would h