The Official Sequential/Oberheim Forum
SEQUENTIAL/DSI => Prophet => Prophet 12 => Topic started by: LoboLives on August 17, 2017, 04:22:34 AM
-
I'm pretty confused as to why anyone thinks there can be the best of both worlds within one unit... Analog and digital work better within two different mediums. Given all the parameters, digital synthesis is much more feasible on a computer and doesn't need to run through the filters.
Emulator ii > Plug Ins.
There can be a healthy best of both worlds in a single unit. The JDXa is a close example..it's UI is garbage but the concept is great....even the original Evolver had analog and digital.
-
Given all the parameters, digital synthesis is much more feasible on a computer and doesn't need to run through the filters.
Some might disagree with that assertion:
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-H3JfrzHMbYU/T08vb__W-4I/AAAAAAAD_Os/omREhJhvTvQ/s1600/%2524%2528KGrHqJ%252C%2521o4E8ViOVpLWBPTyMyHtEw%257E%257E60_57.JPG)
The Waldorf AFB16 was a USB-based 16-channel D/A -> VCF -> A/D outboard interface, which was integrated into the "Red" version of the PPG Wave 2.V plugin, along with a few general-purpose insert VSTs. It was effectively the same discrete analogue filters used in the Q+ synthesizer.
Of course, not everything needs to be digitally pristine...with a handful of exceptions, nearly every digital device I have purchased within the last few years has analogue filters bound to its voices. These make a huge difference, even if each is simply left at its topmost cutoff setting.
As another example–on the E-mu SP12(00), the fixed-cutoff SSM20XX VCFs were actually used as a portion of the reconstruction filter on the DAC outputs.
-
The JDXa doesn't exactly fit the bill of "best of both worlds."
Also just because something doesn't "need" to run through a filter, doesn't necessarily mean it wouldn't sound better doing so. You're also not talking a single unit either.
Now perhaps you get some slightly unique mixture of the two, but the two certainly lend themselves more to different mediums. You're not going to match what's possible on computers these days in the digital realm. That's not to say someone couldn't build some insane hardware dedicated to replicating all the parameters with knobs; just that it would be somewhat unpractical doing so. I've learned to come to terms with working in-the-box for certain needs even though I like many here prefer the tactile nature of hardware synthesis. I'd be first in line for some chimera, albeit I think time would be better spent searching for unicorns.
-
You're not going to match what's possible on computers these days in the digital realm. That's not to say someone couldn't build some insane hardware dedicated to replicating all the parameters with knobs; just that it would be somewhat unpractical doing so. I've learned to come to terms with working in-the-box for certain needs even though I like many here prefer the tactile nature of hardware synthesis. I'd be first in line for some chimera, albeit I think time would be better spent searching for unicorns.
While there's no contesting that a 4C/8T Intel-Core i7 is a fairly powerful processor for audio synthesis purposes, in practice the resource contention within the desktop OSes themselves (Linux included) has a tendency to get in the way of solid real-time performance. There are certainly better alternatives out there for audio, of course, though you lose the benefits of a developer ecosystem as you tend toward more highly-optimized environments.
Lacking specialized hardware, the typical desktop / laptop PC with a native audio engine just doesn't deliver the goods in terms of latency–nor do tablet / handheld devices. It's just not what they were designed / optimized for.
Back to the topic at hand: the responsiveness of a modern, DSP-based hybrid polysynth such as the Prophet-12 is really quite hard to beat, compared to a USB MIDI controller and a desktop PC.
P.S. Older digital gear certainly suffers from the same problem of latency, though the 68K CPU in my Prophet-2000 is significantly slower than the embedded microcontroller in my dishwasher, for what it's worth....
-
I suppose I concede that you have a next level of awareness when it comes to what significantly effects your performance than I do. These days, latency is only still an issue that effects my playing ability when it comes to electronic drum kits. Still, I don't see how the minutia of latency undermines the overall point I was trying to make.
-
I suppose I concede that you have a next level of awareness when it comes to what significantly effects your performance than I do. These days, latency is only still an issue that effects my playing ability when it comes to electronic drum kits. Still, I don't see how the minutia of latency undermines the overall point I was trying to make.
Actually, you just made it–for any patch that utilizes a prominent percussive attack component, those buffer settings make a big difference, especially for anyone that grew up playing an acoustic (say, hammer- or plectrum-based) keyboard instrument. Even the Hartmann Neuron, which is effectively a purpose-built, embedded PC at its heart, suffers from this latency on percussive tones (though it does an amazing job nonetheless):
(http://i.imgur.com/reyMz.jpg)
-
This continues a discussion which I moved from "Placing the Prophet 12".