The Official Sequential/Oberheim Forum
SEQUENTIAL/DSI => Prophet => Sequential Prophet X => Topic started by: T-Punk on October 09, 2018, 04:24:46 PM
-
A friend of mine bought Prophet X a month ago and despite we both like some features (Dave Rossum's stereo filter, sonic character of the instrument, hardware design... ) we see some serious lack of features in the digital part. The whole synth idea obviously looks very promising, but unfinished and weak although the instrument claimed as the "breakthrough". We see the "sample playback + analog filter" conception just not innovative enough to call it the most ground-breaking evolution of the Prophet. So we want to find out if some updates planned and what is the future of the X project.
Taking into the account hardware specs of the synth are there plans to implement those functions in upcoming updates:
1) Warping or Time Machines on samples. At the moment there's no such a simple feature to let play samples at various pitches while keeping the sample length the same. Without warping it's impossible to work with phrases, also chords sounds dirty when the pitch varies from the original value. Without this, the sampler part looks just outdated.
2) Better crossfade on samples. There's no way to avoid clicking while working with very short sample parts. Some kind of fix needed.
3) What will be the functionality of the computer software which is coming in December? Is it only for sample transfer or more advanced function planned such as user waves, wavetables, drawing your own waves on the screen, spectral resynthesis from audio? Basically, is some kind of symbiosis of computer and synthesizer possible as part of X project (like it was realized in Fairlight 40 years ago for example )?
4) Any developments on granular synthesis implementation planned? At the moment there are no real granulator functions in X (even if you compare it with basic free plugins or iOS apps ).
5) Dave Rossum recently released Assimil8tor eurorack sampler module with really cool phase modulation, control over sample rate, bit depth, aliasing, and generally extensive sample manipulation and looping capabilities (for example - making LFO's out of samples and use them as mod source). Maybe it's a chance to improve X and invite Dave Rossum to work on X engine and share his inventions.
6) Yes, it's good to have 150GB of quality samples as a nice addition to the synthesis part, but the variety of instruments isn't so great (do we really need so many types of clarinets or pianos? There are other instruments and sample libraries which do this part better and what is also important - for less money ). So future sample packs plans look not so exciting.
What we want to see is a futuristic synthesizer with unique features rather than a hardware sample player with outdated specs. Strong digital sound design tools + great warm sounding Sequential analog part could be a winner on the market. At the moment, unfortunately, the competitor's products look more advanced.
In other words, please let us know what we should expect out of future developments of X? Any major updates planned or the synth concept is finished and won't change any longer?
-
I don't think you are going to get what you want. Looking at Dave's interview with Paul Dither he basically was like "The problem with samplers is it never ends. The constant demand of features is ongoing." I think Sequential is mostly going to worry about firmware updates for the Prophet-X and leave everything else up to 8Dio as far as libraries, sound packs, software, editors, etc.
-
Well, 8dio participation in a Prophet X project is more like a "fuel" for the "engine" which is developed by Sequential. I guess they are not engineers, they do libraries, but we are talking here about innovations in synthesizers and Prophet line, not in sampling techniques. However, maybe we will contact 8Dio directly and ask to explain their point of view.
-
Well, 8dio participation in a Prophet X project is more like a "fuel" for the "engine" which is developed by Sequential. I guess they are not engineers, they do libraries, but we are talking here about innovations in synthesizers and Prophet line, not in sampling techniques. However, maybe we will contact 8Dio directly and ask to explain their point of view.
Sequential simply built the body and took the basics of their approach to subtractive synthesis but instead of using only oscillators they are using sample content provided by 8Dio. All the samples, soundpacks, editors, user sampling, keyboard mapping...that’s all on 8Dio. Sequential has done their part and other than a few basic things like beat sync, transposing Unison sequences on the fly and stuff there’s not much that’s going to be added to the PX on their end. The ball is in 8Dios court now. For me...I’ve scored 4 films this year with two more in the works and they all had the PX on them. So I’m fine if 8Dio takes their time.
-
I'd say that your first point (Sample Stretching) of course would have been nice, but when you have that immense amounts of sample memory available, you should be able to simply throw a single sample on every key that you yourself have prepared any way you want it to... including time stretching them... there are plenty of audio editors that will time stretch samples so you could in theory use that to prepare your phrases, and then create an instrument for them... when the user sample option is available that is... I'm aware that this will not give you full live control over a sample with timestretching, but it'll be a bit closer to it.
In other words; many sample editing functions COULD be done offline... this is where the software that DSI will deliver would be extra handy, if it could do these simple tasks automatically for you (say; import a single sample, and place it on all keys, sample stretching them along the way)...
But I must admit that I doubt we'll see that... it'll probably be a simple basic import program with the most basic settings available like velocity layers etc... we'll just have to wait and see what that software will offer...
Also please remember, that Dave pointed out that the X never was meant to replace a real sampler... it is a sampling synthesizer, meant to give sound designers an option to create synthesized sounds with the use of sample oscillators... if you think of the X as you do older samplers (like the E-MU Emulators for example) you'll probably be very disappointed.
-
I'd say that your first point (Sample Stretching) of course would have been nice, but when you have that immense amounts of sample memory available, you should be able to simply throw a single sample on every key that you yourself have prepared any way you want it to... including time stretching them... there are plenty of audio editors that will time stretch samples so you could in theory use that to prepare your phrases, and then create an instrument for them... when the user sample option is available that is... I'm aware that this will not give you full live control over a sample with timestretching, but it'll be a bit closer to it.
In other words; many sample editing functions COULD be done offline... this is where the software that DSI will deliver would be extra handy, if it could do these simple tasks automatically for you (say; import a single sample, and place it on all keys, sample stretching them along the way)...
But I must admit that I doubt we'll see that... it'll probably be a simple basic import program with the most basic settings available like velocity layers etc... we'll just have to wait and see what that software will offer...
Also please remember, that Dave pointed out that the X never was meant to replace a real sampler... it is a sampling synthesizer, meant to give sound designers an option to create synthesized sounds with the use of sample oscillators... if you think of the X as you do older samplers (like the E-MU Emulators for example) you'll probably be very disappointed.
I don't think we'll ever really see a modern day Emulator. I mean I suppose a lot of workstations could be considered similar but no real dedicated sampler with analog filters and VCAs, 8-10 track midi sequencer. But with Novation coming out with their new midi controller with a built in 8 track sequencer...who knows.
-
Could the Prophet X be the Prophet VS of its day? I see a lot of derisiveness towards it online. I think the main obstacle aside from price has been the lackluster marketing. Had I not heard some of the beautiful sounds Nick displayed in the Sonic State review, I'd undoubtedly not think much of the X. Obviously the sales figures could be surpassing expectations for all I know, but perhaps do a soft [re]launch when the user sample function is finally ready. Start putting out some in-depth videos from the Sequential team.
-
Could the Prophet X be the Prophet VS of its day? I see a lot of derisiveness towards it online. I think the main obstacle aside from price has been the lackluster marketing. Had I not heard some of the beautiful sounds Nick displayed in the Sonic State review, I'd undoubtedly not think much of the X. Obviously the sales figures could be surpassing expectations for all I know, but perhaps do a soft [re]launch when the user sample function is finally ready. Start putting out some in-depth videos from the Sequential team.
I think two things did a disservice in representing the synth: The demonstrations by Gerry Basserman who admittedly said he didn’t know much about the synth before demonstrating it and the presets themselves which focused a lot on the oscillators as opposed to the samples or buried the samples under loads of modulation which ultimately resulted in more drone and soundscape patches rather than playable ones.
-
buried the samples under loads of modulation which ultimately resulted in more drone and soundscape patches rather than playable ones.
Perhaps, but I see more of the flip side being the issue. People think it's simply a rompler because they see videos with "subtle" modulation. They correctly point out that they can accomplish the same and then some at a fraction of the price with their VST libraries that are aimed at doing that task. Furthermore, they can use their MPE devices and accomplish way more expressive realism. When the real magic of this instrument comes from successfully blending the synthesis aspects with rather unique samples to produce beautiful sounds that cannot be accomplished solely with standard instruments that have been around for centuries. This seems to be a fine art that like you say, may not have been pulled off to the highest degree within the presets.
So sure, it's well capable of doing what you personally want with it. However, I think it's potentially capable of so much more.
-
Sequential simply built the body and took the basics of their approach to subtractive synthesis but instead of using only oscillators they are using sample content provided by 8Dio. All the samples, soundpacks, editors, user sampling, keyboard mapping...that’s all on 8Dio. Sequential has done their part and other than a few basic things like beat sync, transposing Unison sequences on the fly and stuff there’s not much that’s going to be added to the PX on their end. The ball is in 8Dios court now. For me...I’ve scored 4 films this year with two more in the works and they all had the PX on them. So I’m fine if 8Dio takes their time.
I see... So this looks even more strange since 8Dio make libraries for Kontakt and of course, they familiar with its functionality and know what features should be implemented in a modern sample-based instrument.
We've written a letter to the 8dio support, so let's see how they see the situation and if there are plans to develop X software part.
Could the Prophet X be the Prophet VS of its day? I see a lot of derisiveness towards it online. I think the main obstacle aside from price has been the lackluster marketing. Had I not heard some of the beautiful sounds Nick displayed in the Sonic State review, I'd undoubtedly not think much of the X. Obviously the sales figures could be surpassing expectations for all I know, but perhaps do a soft [re]launch when the user sample function is finally ready. Start putting out some in-depth videos from the Sequential team.
Yes, 100% true. Just for example, compare it with how Moog promotes their new polyphonic synth: online demonstrations every single day, support by the top artists, every single feature is deeply explained, all functions work since the launch, and so on. There is something to learn here for other companies.
As for the "modern VS" - yes and yes. We don't really get here why all these technologies invented to animate and customize waveforms from the 80s (as in PPG, VS, Fairlight ) couldn't be realized 40 years after on a new level with much more powerful DSPs and gigabytes more of memory.
-
Don't get me wrong, X is a nice sounding machine, but the situation is a bit strange - it doesn't have serious polyphony, multitimbrality or multi outs so it's really not a competitive sample player (or it should compete with archaic technology at quite a high price). At the same time, X doesn't really take a chance to be synthesizer since there are no so many things to do with sample manipulation (just a static sample with modulated sample start is obviously not enough ).
In other words, why we should be trapped inside 150GB of "All Kinds Of Crazy Shit" (as stated by 8dio... ) at the time when with such an engine we can get much more sonic variety just by working with user waves. Everything is already inside the machine, the only thing needed here is an os update with normal modern day sample manipulation tools.
We don't want to blame Sequential or 8dio. It's just a shame to lose such a chance since almost everything is already implemented and all we need is a more clever software implementation.
Is X an instrument for serious synthesis and sonic innovations or it's just for people who want to play a piano sample thru the analog LP filter?
-
buried the samples under loads of modulation which ultimately resulted in more drone and soundscape patches rather than playable ones.
Perhaps, but I see more of the flip side being the issue. People think it's simply a rompler because they see videos with "subtle" modulation. They correctly point out that they can accomplish the same and then some at a fraction of the price with their VST libraries that are aimed at doing that task. Furthermore, they can use their MPE devices and accomplish way more expressive realism. When the real magic of this instrument comes from successfully blending the synthesis aspects with rather unique samples to produce beautiful sounds that cannot be accomplished solely with standard instruments that have been around for centuries. This seems to be a fine art that like you say, may not have been pulled off to the highest degree within the presets.
So sure, it's well capable of doing what you personally want with it. However, I think it's potentially capable of so much more.
The problem is they never did a walk through with taking a recognizable sample and then manipulating it. They simply showed the final result and people weren’t sure what they were hearing. I don’t even think Gerry did half the time.
-
Don't get me wrong, X is a nice sounding machine, but the situation is a bit strange - it doesn't have serious polyphony, multitimbrality or multi outs so it's really not a competitive sample player (or it should compete with archaic technology at quite a high price). At the same time, X doesn't really take a chance to be synthesizer since there are no so many things to do with sample manipulation (just a static sample with modulated sample start is obviously not enough ).
In other words, why we should be trapped inside 150GB of "All Kinds Of Crazy Shit" (as stated by 8dio... ) at the time when with such an engine we can get much more sonic variety just by working with user waves. Everything is already inside the machine, the only thing needed here is an os update with normal modern day sample manipulation tools.
We don't want to blame Sequential or 8dio. It's just a shame to lose such a chance since almost everything is already implemented and all we need is a more clever software implementation.
Is X an instrument for serious synthesis and sonic innovations or it's just for people who want to play a piano sample thru the analog LP filter?
The X is whatever you put into it. It’s a synthesizer that has VST quality samples as oscillators. That’s what it was advertised as.
-
Will be interesting to see if Prophet X will see the same kind of development as Prophet 12 did: initial doubt but years later people just love it for what it is. Even I want a Prophet 12 (module, if I could afford it). So what I am looking forward to see is how the Prophet X features and sample import develops over the next few years and how the users reacts to it. Because that is what matters: completed instrument usefulness.
As for the "modern VS" - yes and yes. We don't really get here why all these technologies invented to animate and customize waveforms from the 80s (as in PPG, VS, Fairlight ) couldn't be realized 40 years after on a new level with much more powerful DSPs and gigabytes more of memory.
One have to realize two things here:
(1) Sequential makes constrained designs with a set of carefully chosen features that they think will work well for the user.
(2) The amount of resources it takes to realize an instrument with more features as they generally makes one instrument each year.
-
Will be interesting to see if Prophet X will see the same kind of development as Prophet 12 did: initial doubt but years later people just love it for what it is. Even I want a Prophet 12 (module, if I could afford it). So what I am looking forward to see is how the Prophet X features and sample import develops over the next few years and how the users reacts to it. Because that is what matters: completed instrument usefulness.
As for the "modern VS" - yes and yes. We don't really get here why all these technologies invented to animate and customize waveforms from the 80s (as in PPG, VS, Fairlight ) couldn't be realized 40 years after on a new level with much more powerful DSPs and gigabytes more of memory.
One have to realize two things here:
(1) Sequential makes constrained designs with a set of carefully chosen features that they think will work well for the user.
(2) The amount of resources it takes to realize an instrument with more features as they generally makes one instrument each year.
I think the same is true for the Tempest. When it was initially released it didn’t have the features it has now with the final firmware.
-
I really do not think that 8dio will have much say in the engine specifics, i bet they did not have any influence at all on this during development... they are simply just a source SCI chose to work with to get some quality samples into their new product, and if I'm guessing right, 8dio simply had to work with what they got from the Prophet X...
So contacting 8dio and asking them about their future involvement in the engine of the X is probably a bit enthusiastic... if you want to change something about the X, you should go directly at SCI... not 8dio.
There is a dedicated "Feature Request" thread here for just that... but I have to warn you... very little of all those ideas and requets are actually implemented... in general, with DSI devices these days it's "what you see is what you get"... look at what the device does BEFORE you buy... don't expect it to be able to do much more than that, because it'll likely never happen anyway.... i think that the only major feature request I've ever seen implemented was on the Prophet 12 when they implemented linear FM capabilities... all and everything else has just been small bells and whistles.
Hoping for sample stretching is only going to be self torture.... really! ... even though I'm no psychic, it won't happen... such a feature would no doubt put a strain on the sample playback engine... also imagine how it would add up when you have all the other things like granular stuff going on in realtime... it may require a complete rewriting of the sample playback code to implement something like that... I'll advice you to look at a V-Synth instead for that sort of thing.
-
We've written a letter to the 8dio support, so let's see how they see the situation and if there are plans to develop X software part.
As I understand it, Sequential is responsible for all of the firmware development for the Prophet X. 8Dio provided the raw samples along with the software that prepares them for import into the system, and doubtless there was significant discussion and feedback in both directions. If you want more content or have feature requests for the forthcoming user sample software than runs on your Mac or PC, ask 8Dio. If you encounter bugs or want new features on the Prophet X itself, ask Sequential ... but they’ve made it very clear that they consider it a synthesizer capable of integrating samples, not a full-fledged sampler. I expect they’ll stick to that vision.
Yes, 100% true. Just for example, compare it with how Moog promotes their new polyphonic synth: online demonstrations every single day, support by the top artists, every single feature is deeply explained, all functions work since the launch, and so on. There is something to learn here for other companies.
8Dio had daily videos for about a month leading up to the launch of the Prophet X. They were of a very different style than Moog, but they were incredibly effective and some did dig in and illustrate how specific features worked.
Saying that “all features work since the launch” for the new Moog is patently absurd. It hasn’t shipped at all, and they’ve specifically mentioned numerous features that won’t be available and launch as well as several that they’re still scrambling to finish in the next couple of weeks before the first unit ships to a paying customer. I’m enjoying their rollout a great deal, no question, but I also learned a lot and got very excited leading up to the Prophet X launch.
If you’re looking for examples of a botched launch to learn from, I think Waldorf currently holds all the cards with the Quantum.
-
I can see the issue folks have with the practice of releasing a synth a year and moving on. Look at other competing synths in the price range of the PX such as the Montage for example, which has gone through major revisions every year. Not only that, but when you finally get your synth and realize it's missing major features that most products these days have even at a fraction of the cost. I'm just not sure Sequential is built to handle such demands. I keep banging this drum, but if you're going to release these types of cutting edge/high end instruments, which demand sophisticated UI, then some more programmers should be hired. I see Tempest owners still complaining about major missing features that were promised.
Updates like the linear FM added to the P12 and Pro2 should be only one of many major feature updates.
-
I see Tempest owners still complaining about major missing features that were promised.
I see lots of claims that features were promised, but whenever I dig into them all I can find is generic responses along the lines of “we’ll consider it.” If you have a more definitive statement from DSI reps at the time, I’d welcome seeing it, but I couldn’t find any. It looks much more like a case of people who read non-committal, friendly responses as a promise and wind up placing the blame on someone else for their own unrealistic expectations.
-
What I really like to hear is the comment from the official DSI/Sequential support team no matter here or in my email (actually, this topic was started after I sent an email to the support ). It's interesting to know what they really think of X future and perhaps their vision has changed a bit after the release.
We've got a response from 8dio crew. I will not post it here, but the good chances are that they listening and going to try to come out with something soon. However, I guess more requests, opinions, and discussion will only encourage both teams to work on X.
-
Just an example of how a "user wave editor" and more advanced sample editing tools could be used in X.
For instance, we can draw a long ADSR-like wave with many segments in the editor on the computer, upload it into X and use this oscillator to modulate something (with such a matrix we already have inside, it's easy... ). As a result, we get minutes long modulation source which could form the whole music composition. Stretch it, modulate it, use it as a source for the wavetable-like oscillator (wavetables also could be created in the editor and uploaded to X, then we can scan thru them ).
Do you feel what I'm talking about? This sounds more like a synthesis to me comparing to "dark clarinet thru the LP filter".
Isn't it obvious what such a functionality is something different, but still it's nothing impossible here, just need some software tweaks and will to implement it.
-
As an amateur in all kinds of crazy shit, I would like to hear more exciting audio engine performance from Prophet X. Here is just an example of old Russian synthesizer ANS.
http://www.warmplace.ru/soft/ans/
-
I see lots of claims that features were promised, but whenever I dig into them all I can find is generic responses along the lines of “we’ll consider it.” If you have a more definitive statement from DSI reps at the time, I’d welcome seeing it, but I couldn’t find any. It looks much more like a case of people who read non-committal, friendly responses as a promise and wind up placing the blame on someone else for their own unrealistic expectations.
I should have been more clear that was strictly hearsay.
First and foremost there's hardware limitations that need to be considered & anyone who doesn't take that into account is being extremely unrealistic. I do however think it's legitimate for customers to have certain standard expectations depending on the product range. Now I've come to the realization that Sequential is simply not going to be competing with the heavy hitters when it comes to UI, which is something I take into account when looking at the PX. Dave was upfront about his aim with the instrument, albeit consumers would've had to watch his interview with Paul to find out as much.
-
The problem with all these feature requests, that was not even part of the design philosophy for the Prophet X on launch is that the UI is more or less tailored to the engine... if you were to implement all these extra features, many parameters would be burried in complex screen menus and completely drain the otherwise logical layout of the synth... also many requests simply defeat with the design philosophy being contradictory to things already there, or worse; destroying backward compatibility... many people who ask for features have no clue to what it takes programming wise to implement them, a lot think it's just a "simple matter of changing a bit of code" when it is often even a hardware restraint... just look at how many times people on the REV2 feature request list is asking for "seperate volume control of the two oscillators" when that is a hardware restraint... the Curtis chip has a hardwired oscillator mix CV input, and no way to change it at all...
This is why I'm saying; FORGET IT! ... all that sample-engine talk that are in this thread, even if it would be heavenly cool to implement, might not even be possible for several reasons both hardware and software... on top of that, so huge features would require extra time and effort to make, and on top of this it may not even follow design philosophy and further complicate the UI with added parameters...
It would be cool if SCI did it... but given my past many years of experience with SCI bug fixing and feature implementation I can say straight away, that it will not happen... it would be easier making a stone cry ;)
besides... if they really DID implement a sample engine feature that someone has you'd have 10 users wanting more after that, and several of the things they'd want would probably even contradict each other in many ways... it would simply go on and on and on forever.
Another thing you should think about is, that the more features implemented, the more potential for more bugs being present... there are probably plenty already still needing a fix, and I for one would rather see the current bugs being fixed to 100%, than a continuous stream of feature additions supplying us with more bugs.
-
The problem with all these feature requests, that was not even part of the design philosophy for the Prophet X on launch is that the UI is more or less tailored to the engine... if you were to implement all these extra features, many parameters would be burried in complex screen menus and completely drain the otherwise logical layout of the synth... also many requests simply defeat with the design philosophy being contradictory to things already there, or worse; destroying backward compatibility... many people who ask for features have no clue to what it takes programming wise to implement them, a lot think it's just a "simple matter of changing a bit of code" when it is often even a hardware restraint... just look at how many times people on the REV2 feature request list is asking for "seperate volume control of the two oscillators" when that is a hardware restraint... the Curtis chip has a hardwired oscillator mix CV input, and no way to change it at all...
This is why I'm saying; FORGET IT! ... all that sample-engine talk that are in this thread, even if it would be heavenly cool to implement, might not even be possible for several reasons both hardware and software... on top of that, so huge features would require extra time and effort to make, and on top of this it may not even follow design philosophy and further complicate the UI with added parameters...
It would be cool if SCI did it... but given my past many years of experience with SCI bug fixing and feature implementation I can say straight away, that it will not happen... it would be easier making a stone cry ;)
besides... if they really DID implement a sample engine feature that someone has you'd have 10 users wanting more after that, and several of the things they'd want would probably even contradict each other in many ways... it would simply go on and on and on forever.
Another thing you should think about is, that the more features implemented, the more potential for more bugs being present... there are probably plenty already still needing a fix, and I for one would rather see the current bugs being fixed to 100%, than a continuous stream of feature additions supplying us with more bugs.
Exactly what Dave said in the interview with Paul Dither "The problem with samplers is it's endless, the feature requests go on and on and it just becomes more and more cumbersome."
-
For me...I’ve scored 4 films this year with two more in the works and they all had the PX on them. So I’m fine if 8Dio takes their time.
This is exactly what I wanted to hear. Do you have any examples of the stuff you've been doing with it?
I've heard some people describe it as Kontakt in a DSI body for way too much money, and conceptually... I'm having a hard time disputing that. But the sounds I've heard so far are very sexy.
Do you have any experience with Falcon? I wonder how you would compare it to that? (other than the obvious sound quality difference)
-
For me...I’ve scored 4 films this year with two more in the works and they all had the PX on them. So I’m fine if 8Dio takes their time.
This is exactly what I wanted to hear. Do you have any examples of the stuff you've been doing with it?
I've heard some people describe it as Kontakt in a DSI body for way too much money, and conceptually... I'm having a hard time disputing that. But the sounds I've heard so far are very sexy.
Do you have any experience with Falcon? I wonder how you would compare it to that? (other than the obvious sound quality difference)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_UbIdDXhkk
-
Do you like this sound?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGfmnrcO7KA
-
in the "feature requests" thread, my 2 requests were almost the same as the one you have under 1) and 2).
so it seems that i am not the only one.
while the tme stretching would be nice to have, the improvement of the whole looping/crossfading thing is a must i would say.
-
music is not the number of notes played, but what is the soul. where is cool audio synthesis?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMGDg9zj3o4
-
We need a new synthesis, rather than the concentration camp of the pseudo conservatory of tradition.
-
We need a new synthesis, rather than the concentration camp of the pseudo conservatory of tradition.
After Prophet Rev2 and Prophet X/XL it definitely feels like its about time for more adventurous voice architecture designs.
-
We need a new synthesis, rather than the concentration camp of the pseudo conservatory of tradition.
After Prophet Rev2 and Prophet X/XL it definitely feels like its about time for more adventurous voice architecture designs.
4 Part multitimbrality. Each part with it's own effects, sequence, arpeggiator, patch etc.
A return to the Poly Evolver analog oscillator/digital oscillator type approach.
2 Analog oscillators with Sine, Triangle, Square, Saw and SuperSaw waves.
2 Digital oscillators with VS waves, FM, wavetables from the P12.
Dual effects with the standard reverbs, chorus, delays, phaser, flanger, ring mod and more exotic ones like reverse delay, harmonizer and possibly vocoder.
10 voices with a 10 voice expansion option to 20 voices.
-
A return to the Poly Evolver analog oscillator/digital oscillator type approach.
Seems like you know the lyrics for this classic old song, LoboLives! I have a possibly better idea for a next generation Evolver/VS but it requires new technology to be developed.
-
A return to the Poly Evolver analog oscillator/digital oscillator type approach.
Seems like you know the lyrics for this classic old song, LoboLives! I have a possibly better idea for a next generation Evolver/VS but it requires new technology to be developed.
Well I'm just thinking of something they could do that isn't currently in their catalog. They have digital oscillator synths and analog oscillator synths but not an actual hybrid.
-
Well I'm just thinking of something they could do that isn't currently in their catalog. They have digital oscillator synths and analog oscillator synths but not an actual hybrid.
Its something that a lot of users would love to see. But its all up to the company to decide what they want to do next. Which in turn may be restricted to classes of designs that can pass The Dave Filter (TM).
-
With all of the unexpected twists and turns that Sequential/DSI has taken over the years, it's hard not to believe that they will finally produce something Evolver-esque. There have been so many online discussions wishing for such an instrument, and Sequential has so thoroughly covered their normal synthesizer territory, that it seems inevitable they'll sooner or later turn in this direction. It would be intriguing to have an instrument that stands out from all their other designs, something miles away from a Prophet '08/Rev2/-6. I'd even be in favor of an all-digital instrument in the Wavestation tradition - with more control and improved technology, of course.
-
Regarding a new Evolver like synth, I've been thinking about a way to obtain a more analog sounding digital oscillator that might work in such a synth... people keep talking about having mixed analog and digital oscillators, but why not try to create a hybrid oscillator instead that will allow any of them to be switched between analog and digital? one that maybe will help inducing some analog character into digital waveforms and better the aliasing?
in situations where you want to create tables of digitally stored single cycle waveforms like on the old Evolver, you usually play these by using an accumulator... a simple ramp waveform "oscillator" that designate where in the digitally stored waveform to take any given sample... What if that accumulator was in fact an analog ramp waveform that gets converted at say; 96Khz, and then used to "lookup" the waveform in a table of many available digitally stored waveforms?
The analog ramp would have it's analog character to it, so the waveform it looks up would allways contain the imperfections of the sampled analog ramp waveform... if you wanted the raw analog ramp waveform instead you could easilly bypass the lookup, and it would be just like it was with the old Evolver (it's analog oscillators were also converted to digital before being converted back to analog, and did NOT have any hearable digital artifacts like the digital oscillators had, even though it was in fact "digital" after the conversion).
If this analog ramp waveform could also be modulated via a Shape parameter, then you could get some serious waveshaping going on as well... also Sync and Ringmod between the analog ramp waveforms would open up further possibilities.
I could easily see a factory waveform bank of 256 waveforms, plus the capabillity to include one waveform for each oscillator inside the actual program structure, so that you could create your own, or copy the factory ones into, so that a program's used waveform becomes part of the instrument...
Four such oscillators would be cool i think... the rest of the specs could be anything to mangle the sound even further using digital DSP.
-
people keep talking about having mixed analog and digital oscillators, but why not try to create a hybrid oscillator instead that will allow any of them to be switched between analog and digital?
There are definitely an interesting design space of hybrid oscillators. If you ask me I would say that that is the future of analog synthesis. Moog One heads a bit in that direction too though with different and simpler waveforms. But as simple as the idea sounds its likely to take a lot of time and experimentation to get it to sound great.
-
With all of the unexpected twists and turns that Sequential/DSI has taken over the years, it's hard not to believe that they will finally produce something Evolver-esque.
I think we are many wishing that to happen. My primary concern however is the product management side of things: how to avoid too much overlap in their product range.
-
people keep talking about having mixed analog and digital oscillators, but why not try to create a hybrid oscillator instead that will allow any of them to be switched between analog and digital?
There are definitely an interesting design space of hybrid oscillators. If you ask me I would say that that is the future of analog synthesis. Moog One heads a bit in that direction too though with different and simpler waveforms. But as simple as the idea sounds its likely to take a lot of time and experimentation to get it to sound great.
It certainly needs experimentation, and probably a very precise calibration of the ramp waveform so that it always goes from zero to maximum in any case when it has been converted to digital, otherwise the lookup of the digital waveform will be distorted (or rather waveshaped)... but if that can be done, the rest is actually rather simple to implement as soon as it has been converted into digital ... then the converted value is simply an index used to lookup the desired waveform in a stored digtal waveform, and you would not even need complex digital DSP doing any oscillator accumulation or anything... the pitch will always follow the analog ramp waveform, and thus I THINK that it will also inherit the analog waveforms nonexisting aliasing since there is no rounding errors and the like, like there are in a digitally created oscillator... if it's more complicated than i think i cannot say... but I sure as heck would love to try this out :) ... it is basically just simple waveshaping, but I do not recall having seen any company try this sort of oscillator approach, unless I'm unaware of it.
-
Moderator edit: please stay on topic.
Thanks!
-
I think a lot of this is getting off topic which is what the future of the Prophet-X holds on what features we would like to see.
-
Personally? I'd like to see a few things:
Properly Crossfading Modulated Loops so I can sweep the loop location with continuous input without the current horrific habit of bypassing the crossfade and producing a rather non-musical series of loud clicks. The problem is much more noticeable when moving the loop toward the start of the sample (opposite the direction of playback), and it makes one of the more intriguing features of the Prophet X completely useless IMHO. Most of the solutions I can imagine for this would result in briefly delaying the change in loop position and I'd be thrilled to make that tradeoff.
Dynamic Voice Allocation between layers. Instead of having a fixed 4/4 or 8/8 voice allocation between layers, let me use a single voice for a lead or bass part, while using all of the remaining voices for chords. If true dynamic allocation isn't realistic, consider noticing when a layer is in mono mode and automatically balance the voice count as appropriate. True dynamic allocation would have more benefits still, as in stacked situations where one of the two layers is a short percussive attack.
A One-Time Random Mod Source each time a voice is triggered, a unique random value that can be used to ensure that multiple voices aren't identically configured (eg: to allow LFO speeds to vary from voice to voice.) Unlike Noise or Slop, this value would stay the same for the duration of the voice.
MPE Support would be great to see in just about any new synth. Hopefully it becomes standard on future Sequential offerings, and it would be nice to see it make an appearance in the Prophet X as well.
-
Personally? I'd like to see a few things:
Properly Crossfading Modulated Loops so I can sweep the loop location with continuous input without the current horrific habit of bypassing the crossfade and producing a rather non-musical series of loud clicks. The problem is much more noticeable when moving the loop toward the start of the sample (opposite the direction of playback), and it makes one of the more intriguing features of the Prophet X completely useless IMHO. Most of the solutions I can imagine for this would result in briefly delaying the change in loop position and I'd be thrilled to make that tradeoff.
Dynamic Voice Allocation between layers. Instead of having a fixed 4/4 or 8/8 voice allocation between layers, let me use a single voice for a lead or bass part, while using all of the remaining voices for chords. If true dynamic allocation isn't realistic, consider noticing when a layer is in mono mode and automatically balance the voice count as appropriate. True dynamic allocation would have more benefits still, as in stacked situations where one of the two layers is a short percussive attack.
A One-Time Random Mod Source each time a voice is triggered, a unique random value that can be used to ensure that multiple voices aren't identically configured (eg: to allow LFO speeds to vary from voice to voice.) Unlike Noise or Slop, this value would stay the same for the duration of the voice.
MPE Support would be great to see in just about any new synth. Hopefully it becomes standard on future Sequential offerings, and it would be nice to see it make an appearance in the Prophet X as well.
All great suggestions.
The first one I've reported to Sequential, and the response was that this has been noted. A suggestion they had might be to add a mode to switch the playback direction to follow the direction of the centerpoint modulation. Not necessarily going to be possible or implemented though.
It does frustrate me a lot, and as you say, it negates the usefulness of centrepoint modulation, which was one of the key features that attracted me to the PX.
The last one could be achieved (I think) with a very slow random LFO with keytrig switched on (and perhaps a very high slew rate so if it does cycle during the note on it drifts slowly?)
-
Moderator edit: Stop spamming this topic.
Thanks!
-
Does anyone know how to load the new alternate tunings in? What is the procedure? I have the .syx file, can I do it with a USB drive?
-
Can't load the tunings via the thumb drive. They can be loaded via the USB or MIDI port in the same manner as factory sound bank files. Instructions for doing so can be found here:
https://www.sequential.com/prophet-x-factory-sounds/
Hope this helps!
-
C6 and a USB cable - worked perfectly
thank you so much for all the scales. -TERRY RILEY !! YEAH !!
fantastic ***
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqVngb6IWnY
-
Not yet in France !!!!!!!!!
-
Not yet anywhere. The latest date I've been given is "late October or early November." Of course that follows a long series of prior dates: May 2018, at Prophet X launch, June 2018, August 2018, and currently on their site as Late 2018. Their Facebook page announced Oct 18th, and the video mentioned Oct 25th.
So it's anyone's guess, but to me it's looking likely to happen around the same time the Prophet XL starts shipping and the current beta firmware is finalized.
-
Not yet anywhere. The latest date I've been given is "late October or early November." Of course that follows a long series of prior dates: May 2018, at Prophet X launch, June 2018, August 2018, and currently on their site as Late 2018. Their Facebook page announced Oct 18th, and the video mentioned Oct 25th.
So it's anyone's guess, but to me it's looking likely to happen around the same time the Prophet XL starts shipping and the current beta firmware is finalized.
Just been on a chat session with them, supposed to be released today, believe it when I see it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=8&v=cqVngb6IWnY
-
Not yet anywhere. The latest date I've been given is "late October or early November." Of course that follows a long series of prior dates: May 2018, at Prophet X launch, June 2018, August 2018, and currently on their site as Late 2018. Their Facebook page announced Oct 18th, and the video mentioned Oct 25th.
So it's anyone's guess, but to me it's looking likely to happen around the same time the Prophet XL starts shipping and the current beta firmware is finalized.
Just been on a chat session with them, supposed to be released today, believe it when I see it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=8&v=cqVngb6IWnY
I did a chat too and they just said not yet and coming soon. Maybe they like you better :-)
-
Not yet anywhere. The latest date I've been given is "late October or early November." Of course that follows a long series of prior dates: May 2018, at Prophet X launch, June 2018, August 2018, and currently on their site as Late 2018. Their Facebook page announced Oct 18th, and the video mentioned Oct 25th.
So it's anyone's guess, but to me it's looking likely to happen around the same time the Prophet XL starts shipping and the current beta firmware is finalized.
Just been on a chat session with them, supposed to be released today, believe it when I see it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=8&v=cqVngb6IWnY
I did a chat too and they just said not yet and coming soon. Maybe they like you better :-)
Just make them an offer they can't refuse....
-
Done!!!!!
Fantastic!!!!!!
It Sounds Mamma miaaaa!!!!
-
Samples are best edited on your computer, then transfer to the X when that feature becomes available. I would much rather do it that way.
-
sad clown. Happy friends!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=7&v=aqv7Rshlw-o
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUjtEFCDqhE