The Official Sequential/Oberheim Forum
SEQUENTIAL/DSI => Prophet => Sequential Prophet X => Topic started by: jg666 on July 31, 2018, 07:45:34 AM
-
It’s not a full review but it’s a 9 minute preview video from Nick on Sonicstate :)
-
Here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoFqUcHJgOA
-
No that's not it, that's an old one.
This is the link for the new one, I couldn't post it before as I wasn't on my own PC :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMxQNOCBRlY
-
The full review is now available on Sonicstate....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pMDVBkiLso (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pMDVBkiLso)
-
Nick gets it. It is a sound design tool. Not a workstation. I felt an immediate connection to the hardware when I played with one at Sweetwater Gearfest. I’m saving up for something else right now or I would be tempted by the PX!
-
Nick gets it. It is a sound design tool. Not a workstation.
Agreed, this is what I wanted to hear out of the PX all along. Glad they sent one to Nick.
I don't want to keep harping on DSI about UI, but really, no audio waveform visual?
-
Was that the first video where Nick didn't drone on about PWM? If so, the Prophet X deserves an award just for that!
;D
-
Was that the first video where Nick didn't drone on about PWM? If so, the Prophet X deserves an award just for that!
;D
;D Excellent!
-
I meant to say that I listened to this review through a good pair of headphones and the Prophet X sounded immense which was very pleasing :)
-
I don't want to keep harping on DSI about UI, but really, no audio waveform visual?
Given the lack of a large screen on the PX, I don’t see it as a significant omission. Sure, the Prologue has one on a tiny OLED screen but it strikes me as more of a novelty than a truly useful tool. I found a software-based oscilloscope on a computer screen with additional tools like spectrum analysis much more useful. YMMV.
The review video was a good overview for those who haven’t been able to spend time with the PX, and I came to essentially the same conclusions myself. I was only sorry he wasn’t able to provide any inside scoop on 8dio plans, forthcoming firmware, or anything else owners don’t already know.
-
I don't want to keep harping on DSI about UI, but really, no audio waveform visual?
Given the lack of a large screen on the PX, I don’t see it as a significant omission....
I'd agree that the lack of waveforms on the display isn't a huge issue, but I would like to see a better algorithm for finding loop point when editing samples....
-
I don't want to keep harping on DSI about UI, but really, no audio waveform visual?
Given the lack of a large screen on the PX, I don’t see it as a significant omission....
I'd agree that the lack of waveforms on the display isn't a huge issue, but I would like to see a better algorithm for finding loop point when editing samples....
I think any in depth sample editing/mapping is going to be done with their software editor. I know it be nice if it was on board but I think they wanted to keep it as simple as they could.
-
New from Nick - Friday Fun: Prophet X and DrumBrute Impact Synth Jam
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCcTq7ewk2s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCcTq7ewk2s)
-
Nice jam Nick. This prophet X is the easiest keyboard to just flat out find something that sounds different than anything else, but at the same time sound fantastic, that jam could easily be polished into a cinema score.
-
That there is no more editing on the machine I actually find good... it would just allow for a lot more bugs on the device itself if it was to also do sample editing etc... it also simplifies the synth for those who do not want to create their own samples... i like the idea that you create the multisample setup on a computer into in essence, a complete sound... it makes the samples on the device seem much more like an oscillator... which is the approach i always wanted really.
Nick also talks about the sample length being more "grainy" the longer the sample is... this is logical when you look at how the parameter is supposed to be implemented in the Mod Matrix... if the resolution was to be the same as the length of the sample, then the parameter for the loop length/end/start would be different depending on the length of the sample which is not very practical... it's more practical to have a number that has a hardwired length... yes... it will make longer samples have larger chunks, but as long as there is a crossfade function i really do not care.
There is ONE thing I'm very curious about... how the editing software will load in .wav files... in this regard I'm thinking about ESPECIALLY the loop points... I can figure out, that if I use a sample and change the length/start/stop parameters, that I'll then be jumping more than one sample depending on the sample length, but how about if I do not?
I'd really like to know if the .wav that is loaded keeps it's original loop points made with the sample editing software you used? ... when i do sample loops I'm EXTREMELY perfectionistic... even a single sample off, and I'll hear it in 99% of times, and it's completely unacceptable to me in a sampler... I'm therefore curious if the X will take .wav files and their precise loop points? ... if not, then what use will you have for the looping function? ... yes if you loop rhythmic samples you may get away with the end point being some samples off, but if you want to create looped textures for further sound design approaches, then it is REALLY IMPORTANT that the original loop points are kept, and that not a single sample is skipped.
I'm pretty certain, that if the original sample loop is intact, then this is the sample/synth I'm looking for... but if not... then I'm going to have to reconsider if the X is for me... orignal loop points simply HAS TO BE kept!!! it's a total no-go for me if not.
-
That there is no more editing on the machine I actually find good... it would just allow for a lot more bugs on the device itself if it was to also do sample editing etc... it also simplifies the synth for those who do not want to create their own samples... i like the idea that you create the multisample setup on a computer into in essence, a complete sound... it makes the samples on the device seem much more like an oscillator... which is the approach i always wanted really.
Nick also talks about the sample length being more "grainy" the longer the sample is... this is logical when you look at how the parameter is supposed to be implemented in the Mod Matrix... if the resolution was to be the same as the length of the sample, then the parameter for the loop length/end/start would be different depending on the length of the sample which is not very practical... it's more practical to have a number that has a hardwired length... yes... it will make longer samples have larger chunks, but as long as there is a crossfade function i really do not care.
There is ONE thing I'm very curious about... how the editing software will load in .wav files... in this regard I'm thinking about ESPECIALLY the loop points... I can figure out, that if I use a sample and change the length/start/stop parameters, that I'll then be jumping more than one sample depending on the sample length, but how about if I do not?
I'd really like to know if the .wav that is loaded keeps it's original loop points made with the sample editing software you used? ... when i do sample loops I'm EXTREMELY perfectionistic... even a single sample off, and I'll hear it in 99% of times, and it's completely unacceptable to me in a sampler... I'm therefore curious if the X will take .wav files and their precise loop points? ... if not, then what use will you have for the looping function? ... yes if you loop rhythmic samples you may get away with the end point being some samples off, but if you want to create looped textures for further sound design approaches, then it is REALLY IMPORTANT that the original loop points are kept, and that not a single sample is skipped.
I'm pretty certain, that if the original sample loop is intact, then this is the sample/synth I'm looking for... but if not... then I'm going to have to reconsider if the X is for me... orignal loop points simply HAS TO BE kept!!! it's a total no-go for me if not.
We will know more in December but based on the allowable size per sample group (posted before but can't remember off the top of my head though it is considerable for hardware) and the fidelity of the current 8dio samples I would be surprised if you'd have to truncate the .wav files for almost anything you'd want to do.
-
I am not talking about truncating of samples... I am talking about loop start and end points... If these will allways be a number between say; 0 and 999, but the sample is say 10.000 samples long, then the parameter value of 500 would equal sample start 5.000, and value 501 would be sample start 5.100... But what iff the real sample start was 5.046 for example?
If the original sample loop points is quantized like that, then seamless loops will be impossible, and that is not acceptable to me.
-
If the original sample loop points is quantized like that, then seamless loops will be impossible, and that is not acceptable to me.
The Prophet X design is clearly intended to keep things simple, so there's no way to look at a waveform and choose an exact sample. Instead, the system takes vague guidance and seems to try to do the right thing – but I hear you, it would be nice if the specific tactics it uses were better documented. What we do know is that pitched samples "know" their exact pitch, so that in Pitched loop mode your loop will always be an exact multiple of the number of samples in a single cycle. Similarly, in Sync loop mode the length of a loop is locked relative to the current MIDI clock.
So I think it's reasonable to assume that some similar automatic logic applies to the start of a loop. Does it look for a zero crossing near the approximate location selected with the limited granularity? Or assess the loop start and end and look for a good pairing based on level and slope? Who knows. I wish I did, but I'm expecting something sane to make life easy because that's consistent with other design decisions.
-
I am not talking about truncating of samples... I am talking about loop start and end points... If these will allways be a number between say; 0 and 999, but the sample is say 10.000 samples long, then the parameter value of 500 would equal sample start 5.000, and value 501 would be sample start 5.100... But what iff the real sample start was 5.046 for example?
If the original sample loop points is quantized like that, then seamless loops will be impossible, and that is not acceptable to me.
Based on brief conversations with someone at DSI it sounds like further refinements may happen to allow even more precise zero crossing control may be available on the synth in a future update. So who knows. I just know it's something being looked at.
-
But even zero crossing is not good enough in my case... i want the sample loop points to be EXACTLY what they were when I made the loop in my sample editor on the computer... if the PX change these, even a single sample back or forth, then I will not be able to get the loops i would want.
I get that the way it seems to work, is a cool things as well... i like the idea of it fixing the pitch and all that, but a simple standard sample playback with the integrated loop points of a .wav file really should be something any sample playback system should be able to do as well... so I hope it's going to be possible, but I guess I'll have to wait for an answer until more details are out about this.
Besides, if the loop points of the .wav file was used when the sample instrument is first chosen, and the loop points was not messed with by the OS until you chose to manipulate the loop on the PX itself, then it would not be a problem... just use the .wav files integrated loop points when the sample instrument is selected, and then change them if you mess with the loop parameters on the PX thereafter... maybe even just a simple parameter added where you can choose to use original loop points, or the altered ones would be perfect... for my use at least.
I may get a PX anyway, even if it will not feature this, as it will certainly be capable to make a lot of fun things with it, but it is a shame if I cannot play back an original sample loop.
-
The low-precision approach to selecting loop points is almost certainly just how it works from the Prophet X front panel. Precise loop points will be specified as part of the keymap when designed using external software, or I will be downright shocked.
-
Just based on how the synth is designed and how the existing samples are configured I suspect you won’t be setting loop points in the software at all and that the loop function may be only created modified on the PX front panel.
-
Just based on how the synth is designed and how the existing samples are configured I suspect you won’t be setting loop points in the software at all and that the loop function may be only created modified on the PX front panel.
An early peek at the file format on disk showed loop points as part of the keymap, so I’m all but certain that’s not the case. Another hint is that of you start with an init patch and scroll through sample keymaps you’ll see the loop light turn on and off as you find samples with set loop points. Go to the Inst Edit page and you’ll see “Factory Setting” displayed instead of the usual loop UI until you make a change. To return to the factory loop points you go back to the Inst Loop page and turn off “Edit Sample.”
-
If they did not include the original loop points, then how on earth would they be able to play a sustained sample? ... now I'm not familiar with the X as I do not have one yet, but if the loop points was only editable via the crude parameters of the X, then you would have a REALLY hard time setting the points for a seamless loop... even if it may search for the nearest zero-crossing... a perfect zero crossing is not a guarantee of a seamless loop at all... I've been doing looping of samples for over 25 years down to single sample levels, so i know this for a fact.
If the X include some sort of crossfading, that would not cut it anyway... a crossfade requires as many samples prior to the loop start, that will be mixed in just before the loop end to work, and this rarely makes a seamless loop because you are in essence mixing two waveforms in the crossover area, which would be the same as mixing two oscillators, if the sample was of a single oscillator waveform... it creates all kinds of dips in the volume, and the crossfading area is almost always hearable... it's just not good enough for my usage when it comes to seamless looping.
If the original loop points is not used when a sample instrument is selected, then the only way i see to create seamless loops would be to create the loop in the sample editor by replicating the waveform several times, and making the sample so darn long that the envelopes would have died out (the Amp Envelope) long before the end of the sample has been reached, and that would require some pretty long samples, especially because the higher pitches will play faster thru the sample (the famous chipmunk effect of samplers).
I would find it really strange if original loops was not supported because this IS a sound designers sampling synthesizer afteral... it is meant to be taking chunks of audio material and mess around with it in creative ways, not just being a simple workstation playback device, and one of the most interesting aspects of this synth (to me) is that I want to be able to playback any looped snippet of audio that is perfectly looped, and use it as an oscillator building block... and in such a loop, there CANNOT be clicks, pops or ugly cross fades in my opinion... besides I really do not see why it should not be possible to support the original loop points... it should be one of the most simple playback methods... it's not like I'm requireing time stretching or formant shifting or anything, just plain old sample loop points like samplers has been able to since they even started to appear on the market in the 80's!
...and I can easily predict, that if this is not possible when the user sample support is released, that DSI will get pretty many complaints about this... this is something that most people would find mandatory functionality.
The crude settings of the parameters in the engine is fine... in fact i like that idea as I stated earlier for many reasons, and i can certainly see that it's cool that loop points set when you want to get down to granular stuff is automatically fixing the pitch to scale is absolutely cool... I'm not trying to say that this is stupid... I'm just saying, that there should be an option in the looping parameters, to allow you to use either the engine settings, or the original loop points... that way everyone will be happy... including me :D
-
I'm just saying, that there should be an option in the looping parameters, to allow you to use either the engine settings, or the original loop points... that way everyone will be happy... including me
See my post immediately above yours. There is such an option, it’s called “sample edit.” When turned on the loop points can be selected with the coarse 0-999 range, when turned off it reverts back to the precise loop points created by the author of the sample. Or am I missing something in what you’re hoping for? (Aside from the user sample preparation software, of course, which we’re all waiting patiently for.)
-
I'm just saying, that there should be an option in the looping parameters, to allow you to use either the engine settings, or the original loop points... that way everyone will be happy... including me
See my post immediately above yours. There is such an option, it’s called “sample edit.” When turned on the loop points can be selected with the coarse 0-999 range, when turned off it reverts back to the precise loop points created by the author of the sample. Or am I missing something in what you’re hoping for? (Aside from the user sample preparation software, of course, which we’re all waiting patiently for.)
If what you say is true, then everything is fine... But only if the loop points is from the original .wav files... We do not have the X software yet, so no one knows if the loop points are tampered with inside the X software... But I guess it's probably the original loop points... But if not:
A resolution of 0-999 is not good enough... Samples are way bigger than 1000 samples... An increment of 1 would jump in the thousands (or even more) of samples and more... What I want is for the original loop points in the .wav file to be useable, as these can be set to any one sample in the file... It's the only way to retain the exact same loop that you made in your sample editing software on your computer... It is not at all fun, to sit with your editing software meticulously setting up the perfect loop, only to find out that the X has changed these upon loading them up on the X...
Please note, that I do not know if the X will use the original loop points, so there might not even be a problem... I'm just saying that IF not, then it would really be a shame...
Anyway, the sample instruments must have loops set up in the software for the X... Otherwise you would have to manually set up any loop you want whenever you select a sample instrument which would be very tedious... The question is rather, if these loops are set in the X software and have the crude resolution of 0-999, or if the software automatically use the stored loop points in the wave files it loads...
Now that I think about it, even if it only use the crude 0-999 settings, it should still be able to loop an entire sample from start to end if the loop start is 0 and the end is 999... If this is the case, it helps somewhat... Then the only problem would be the loop start if it's not 0... I'd be able to live with that as the samples I'd be making that should loop are usually looped from start to end.... But what about a looped piano for example? That would require the loop start be after the transient part, looping only the sustained part... A 0-999 loop start would certainly make the loop click...
-
I'm just saying, that there should be an option in the looping parameters, to allow you to use either the engine settings, or the original loop points... that way everyone will be happy... including me
See my post immediately above yours. There is such an option, it’s called “sample edit.” When turned on the loop points can be selected with the coarse 0-999 range, when turned off it reverts back to the precise loop points created by the author of the sample. Or am I missing something in what you’re hoping for? (Aside from the user sample preparation software, of course, which we’re all waiting patiently for.)
This is correct--if Sample Edit is not engaged, the user-defined loop points are utilized. In the factory instruments, this means the loop points that 8DIO have defined. Loop points are defined in the forthcoming application, which has resolution down to the sample.
-
I'm just saying, that there should be an option in the looping parameters, to allow you to use either the engine settings, or the original loop points... that way everyone will be happy... including me
See my post immediately above yours. There is such an option, it’s called “sample edit.” When turned on the loop points can be selected with the coarse 0-999 range, when turned off it reverts back to the precise loop points created by the author of the sample. Or am I missing something in what you’re hoping for? (Aside from the user sample preparation software, of course, which we’re all waiting patiently for.)
This is correct--if Sample Edit is not engaged, the user-defined loop points are utilized. In the factory instruments, this means the loop points that 8DIO have defined. Loop points are defined in the forthcoming application, which has resolution down to the sample.
The software will import the sample loop points from the .wav files you load with the software right!? ... we do not have to set up the loop once more in the software eh!?
-
I'm just saying, that there should be an option in the looping parameters, to allow you to use either the engine settings, or the original loop points... that way everyone will be happy... including me
See my post immediately above yours. There is such an option, it’s called “sample edit.” When turned on the loop points can be selected with the coarse 0-999 range, when turned off it reverts back to the precise loop points created by the author of the sample. Or am I missing something in what you’re hoping for? (Aside from the user sample preparation software, of course, which we’re all waiting patiently for.)
This is correct--if Sample Edit is not engaged, the user-defined loop points are utilized. In the factory instruments, this means the loop points that 8DIO have defined. Loop points are defined in the forthcoming application, which has resolution down to the sample.
This is really good news. Looking forward to working with this software.