The Official Sequential/Oberheim Forum
OTHER DISCUSSIONS => General Synthesis => Other Hardware/Software => Topic started by: Sacred Synthesis on June 23, 2016, 07:42:52 AM
-
I'm always searching for big polyphonic (and monophonic) synthesizers. They're rare, expensive, and seem to many folks to be esoteric instruments. Several years ago, I was deciding between a second Prophet '08 and an Andromeda A6. The Andromeda was knowingly being discontinued, had a reputation for being buggy, and Alesis' customer service was infamously poor. So, I went with another Prophet '08 and have regrets. I love the P'08 to bits, but I'm still always keeping my eyes open for new large-scale instruments. So, what is the new Andromeda A6? What has filled the vacuum left by that analog behemoth? Thus far, my best solution has been to expand my Poly Evolver Keyboard with a Rack version, and my Prophet '08 with a Module version. These are now wonderful instruments, but I'm still looking for the "big one."
What do folks consider the best big poly synths currently in production, having the classic analog character? I know Modal Electronics first comes to mind. The 008 and the 002 are fine candidates, but what else? The 008 is a whopping $5,000, which makes starting in the ME direction a bit like human sacrifice. The 002 is also great, but I'm not looking for an instrument with its digital sonic range. I've got my Evolvers for that.
Other possibilities would be to build up an instrument from P-6 or OB-6 modules. The down side of this approach is that multiple modules can make for a chaotic set up. There's the Prophet 12, but this instrument still mystifies me, sound-wise. Finally, DSI is supposedly coming out with a new large-scale instrument next year, but I haven't heard any details beyond that.
-
Whatever it is, each analogue voice ought to be independently replaceable, as with the Prophet 6; on the A6, one cannot fix individual voices without replacing the entire voice board.
IMHO that rules that instrument out, or alternately, necessitates the purchase of a backup voice board PCB at not insignificant cost.
-
There are not really that many options:
A Prophet-6 +/- module, an OB-6 +/- module, a combined P-6/OB-6 setup that allows you to play two different synth voices as layers from one keyboard, or the Modal Electronics 008, which would come closest to the feature set of an Andromeda, or something like the Oberheim Matrix-12. Well, and if budget is no issue, then there's of course the Schmidt. I guess that's about it when it comes to current polyphonic VCO synths for grown-ups.
-
Yes, that's about it for synths for grown-ups, as you say. I find this shocking.
-
It's a niche market, that's for sure. Plus: as the examples show, these instruments are impossible to manufacture in an affordable manner - at least if you want discreet components. Most practical oriented gigging musicians will maybe get one for the studio, but for the road they'll rather use a Korg Kronos, a Nord product, or a Yamaha Montage. Exceptions may be a couple of so-called EDM artists, but that's about it.
-
Basically, I don't think that a lot has changed in that regard since the 1990s. Most practical oriented musicians that I know at least would also question the sonic advantages. It's mostly like, "well, that's nice, but if even I can't tell a difference, how would the audience." In that regard, analog polys are rather regarded as a fairly limited and highly specialized electronic instrument that is of no immediate use for those, who mainly "want to get the job done."
I know an older guy, for example, who's totally into Wersi keyboards and workstations - all the stuff that is great for wedding bands, churches, and solo-entertainers. He doesn't understand what the fuss is all about when it comes to analog. He always says, "yeah, but isn't this exactly like the old Prophets and Rolands from the 1980s? What's so special about that? My keyboard can do all that and more." And he owned a Hammond B-3, Prophets, Moogs, Jupiters, and an Odyssey in the past.
-
I think it says something about synthesists, or the types of musicians that play synthesizer. There obviously are precious few of the sit-down and play a full-scale piece of music types, which looks back to my other thread about solo synthesizer music. The instrument is obviously used almost exclusively as a band instrument, even if the "band" is a drum machine and a multi-track recorder.
The realistic choices for fully programmable polyphonic synthesizers are DSI and Modal Electronics. These are the options for the solo synthesist, and that's about it. I consider Roland and Korg to be in a class below these, even if they do make some fancy workstations. Of course, this wasn't the case once upon a time, but that time has passed. I think the field looked more interesting thirty-five or forty years ago. This is why I'm still holding onto my first generation DSI synthesizers, and why expanding them further still makes good sense. They're about as good as I can find these days.
Jeepers, I might as well start shopping around for a Polymoog
-
Well, Korg provided a playground for Tatsuya Takahashi and his team, while Roland contracted Malekko for their modulars. Both result in either highly affordable products or the modular market, which offers a far more flexible perspective. I mean, companies like Korg, Roland, or Yamaha wouldn't even get out of their beds for the sales numbers of companies like DSI, Moog, Elektron, Modal Electronics, and so on. Yet, these sales numbers give a good impression about the ratio between a couple of synth nerds like us and the average keyboarder that mainly provides those companies with money.
-
Korg might have been the company for large synth guys, but no. (The Kingkorg leaves me feeling bland.) I'm thinking, for example, of the Trident and the PS-3100. Where does one find the modern equivalents of these wonderful instruments? Again, only from DSI and ME. So there's no point in searching high and low for something else. It's a matter of multiplying what little exists, of making a new "Trident" with a five-octave synthesizer and modules.
-
It's a niche market, that's for sure.
Unless DSI does it, I don't see anyone else willing to do it at a reasonable price point. (Sure, the $20k Schmidt will do what you want, but that price tag is too steep.)
Otherwise, you're better off stacking modules. I stack various combinations of P6 / OB6 / P12 from time to time. Easy to do, great results, just need an analogue mixer. :)
-
Korg might have been the company for large synth guys, but no. (The Kingkorg leaves me feeling bland.) I'm thinking, for example, of the Trident and the PS-3100. Where does one find the modern equivalents of these wonderful instruments? Again, only from DSI and ME.
It won't happen. The big companies are in it for big business. It's still nice that Korg provides Takahashi the freedom to design his instruments, which will in most cases be like entry drugs for those who seek analog tones. And I think it's great what he and his team are doing.
But let's say Korg or Roland decide to design an analog flagship, something that is more comparable to a Prophet-6 or a Modal 008. What would happen? - First of all, they would use their advantage to mass produce much cheaper, so those instruments would maybe be $1,000 less or offer more features or polyphony. The average customer will still compare it to a Kronos and the likes and come to the conclusion: the latter can do more. If those companies were lucky, they would maybe sell twice as many units as DSI for example, but that would still be way less than they can usually expect.
On the other side it's clear that those companies who provide us with current poly synths are dedicated to that. Without trying to sound too naive here, it can certainly be stated that people like Dave Smith or Paul Maddox do what they do because they like these kinds of instruments and the unique sounds they're capable of. That makes it a sort of afficionado business. It's a bit like going to a dedicated wine store with a commited seller with acquired taste as opposed to going to a liquor store just to get something that is going to guarantee you a bad headache the next day.
-
Otherwise, you're better off stacking modules. I stack various combinations of P6 / OB6 / P12 from time to time. Easy to do, great results, just need an analogue mixer. :)
I would think a Prophet 12 combined with either two Prophet-6 Modules or two OB-6 Modules would cover all the bases. Unless you're layering the P12, in which case one module would match the six voices. That's something for a big synth guy to consider.
-
Otherwise, you're better off stacking modules. I stack various combinations of P6 / OB6 / P12 from time to time. Easy to do, great results, just need an analogue mixer. :)
I would think a Prophet 12 combined with either two Prophet-6 Modules or two OB-6 Modules would cover all the bases. Unless you're layering the P12, in which case one module would match the six voices. That's something for a big synth guy to consider.
When stacking the P12 with the P6 / OB6, I'm mindful not to exceed 6 voices... But you're right. A P12 and two P6s / OB6s would be a bad ass combination.
-
Whatever it is, each analogue voice ought to be independently replaceable, as with the Prophet 6; on the A6, one cannot fix individual voices without replacing the entire voice board.
IMHO that rules that instrument out, or alternately, necessitates the purchase of a backup voice board PCB at not insignificant cost.
Thank you SO much for pointing that out. I was close to getting an A6 a few weeks ago. Thankful that I didn't. My reasons at the time were: Alesis was never known for long lasting quality and age of the board (leading to increased frailty of an aging synth and lack of parts for inevitable breaks and failures). I'll add needing to replace an entire voice board (which is no longer available) to the list reasons I'm thankful.
Many thanks..... Oh and my Andromeda money went to a Pro 2 and a P12 module. I think I made the wise choice.
-
...and now we have the new DM12 in this category, no?
Even if perhaps less parameters (especially the filter) than the ME008 but you get a 12 voices at 1/5th of the ME008 price!
Of course, we all need first to test it in a store before buying. Only a few months to wait...
-
...and now we have the new DM12 in this category, no?
Even if perhaps less parameters (especially the filter) than the ME008 but you get a 12 voices at 1/5th of the ME008 price!
Of course, we all need first to test it in a store before buying. Only a few months to wait...
Not really comparable. You have more waveform choices on the 008, which provides all classic analog waveforms plus one sub oscillator per VCO. On the DM12 you can only choose between saw and pulse (DCO1) and square (DCO2). And the filter options on the 008 are crazy. Add to that nicer build quality, layout, display, 12 extra keys, and multi-timbrality to name just a few things.
The DM12 might be a nice sounding and flexible synth, but high end synths remain high end synths.
-
There's the Prophet 12, but this instrument still mystifies me, sound-wise. Finally, DSI is supposedly coming out with a new large-scale instrument next year, but I haven't heard any details beyond that.
Agree about the Prophet 12. Almost got one as I loved the specs, possibilities, the panel and GUI(!) but was really disappointed when I hear it's sound (despite finding interesting the few videos on the net). But a few weeks later, I had the chance to try the Pro 2 in a store for a long time and was directly in love (same as P12 but unfortunately not full poly nor bi-timbral).
What about your last sentence? Rumor?
Waiting for a bi-timbral OB6/P6 or OB/P12 hybrid with the nice Pro 2 / P12 panel/screen/interface...
Hence also my interest in future creation from Behringer as well...
Will try having a look to the ME002 but indeed very - very - expensive :-\
-
I couldn't consider the DeepMind 12 to be the new Andromeda. The DM12 is basically a glorified Juno 106 with onboard effects. It's neat and cute and looks fun, but it's far from the big leagues. I'd say the Modal Electronics instruments come much closer to A6 status. And the Prophet 12 as well.
As for the forthcoming new DSI synthesizer, we know next to nothing about it - only that's it's been in the works for a while and may be a large instrument. With the successes of the P12, P-6, and OB-6, wouldn't it be fabulous if DSI put it all together and produced a massive new flagship? It's time to push the borders again. I'm always hoping, hoping, hoping for the new Andromeda.
-
Am I the only one who's like to see selectable OSCs -- DCO or digital?
For example, a 4 OSC layout (like the P12) where the OSCs are totally selectable -- all 4 DCOs, all 4 digital, 2 and 2, whatever...
-
Am I the only one who's like to see selectable OSCs -- DCO or digital?
For example, a 4 OSC layout (like the P12) where the OSCs are totally selectable -- all 4 DCOs, all 4 digital, 2 and 2, whatever...
It's basically a selectable analogue waveshaper stage.
-
I'm all for DCOs, since they sound good and their price is reasonable. I'd like VCO's is a mono synth, though, since they sound great and would be less expensive for the smaller-sized instrument.
-
Drats! I hate being locked out of my own posts and being unable to correct typos. "I'd like VCOs in a mono synth...."
-
on the A6, one cannot fix individual voices without replacing the entire voice board.
Yes you can. You just replace the individual chip. The problem will be finding a chip!
There are other options as well:
- Disable the voice. You might not notice the difference!
- The voice might not actually be dead. There is a bug that makes them appear dead.
-
I'd say the modern analogue with flexibility of the Andromeda is probably the 008. The features are not the same but the 008 can do things the Andromeda can't and vice versa. Sound wise they are mostly quite different but they can overlap. I've was able to pretty much able to replicate my favourite A6 sound on the 008. The 008 generally sounds bigger than the A6 even with half the voices, OTOH the A6 can do a particularly nice ensemble sound I can't get out of anything else and it can do very sharp sounds the 008 can't.
I find the complex synths like the A6 and 008 can act as sonic chameleons. They are pretty good at sounding close to other synths. So, they cost you more but you get a much bigger tonal range and a much bigger range of sounds.
-
on the A6, one cannot fix individual voices without replacing the entire voice board.
Yes you can. You just replace the individual chip. The problem will be finding a chip!
There are other options as well:
- Disable the voice. You might not notice the difference!
- The voice might not actually be dead. There is a bug that makes them appear dead.
Alesis will only sell (past-tense: would only sell) the complete voice board, which is 1) bogus and 2) silly inasmuch as nearly every other IC that Wavefront Semi offers is/was available in limited quantities through the right surplus/catalog electronics distributor.
From the experience of an experienced bench technician / electronics designer / luxury electronics importer, Alesis blew it big time - it remains to be seen how Modal / 20 Electronics / EMC-Schmidt handle service issues for their increasingly expensive offerings.
* - and would also be an interesting question for Uli Behringer to answer: in thirty years' time, how easily will the DeepMind12 units be able to be serviced? Modified? Extended via third-party firmware?
-
I think an interesting contest could be had between the Prophet 12 and the 002. The designers and owners of both boast that these instruments and their digital oscillators have achieved sonic wonders that make analog oscillators blush. I would love to see and hear the two parties compare their instruments. And if one excels in some way or another, I'd like to understand exactly why that is. The discussion would obviously come down to much filter talk, but again, I'd like to follow it.
-
I think an interesting contest could be had between the Prophet 12 and the 002. The designers and owners of both boast that these instruments and their digital oscillators have achieved sonic wonders that make analog oscillators blush. I would love to see and hear the two parties compare their instruments. And if one excels in some way or another, I'd like to understand exactly why that is. The discussion would obviously come down to much filter talk, but again, I'd like to follow it.
There's a dedicated thread on Gearslutz: https://www.gearslutz.com/board/electronic-music-instruments-electronic-music-production/979461-prophet-12-modulus-002-comparable.html?highlight=prophet+12+modulus+002+comparable (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/electronic-music-instruments-electronic-music-production/979461-prophet-12-modulus-002-comparable.html?highlight=prophet+12+modulus+002+comparable)
And there are other 002 threads, where the Prophet 12 has been brought up too.
-
Of course I know this will never happen, but I would like to see someone license the design from Alesis and remake the Andromeda...
-
I think an interesting contest could be had between the Prophet 12 and the 002. The designers and owners of both boast that these instruments and their digital oscillators have achieved sonic wonders that make analog oscillators blush. I would love to see and hear the two parties compare their instruments. And if one excels in some way or another, I'd like to understand exactly why that is. The discussion would obviously come down to much filter talk, but again, I'd like to follow it.
I'm not sure the comparison would be completely fair... I mean you're talking about a $3000 machine vs a $5000 machine.
However, for $5000, you could have a P12 and a P12 module... now that would be an interesting comparison.
-
I think an interesting contest could be had between the Prophet 12 and the 002. The designers and owners of both boast that these instruments and their digital oscillators have achieved sonic wonders that make analog oscillators blush. I would love to see and hear the two parties compare their instruments. And if one excels in some way or another, I'd like to understand exactly why that is. The discussion would obviously come down to much filter talk, but again, I'd like to follow it.
There's a dedicated thread on Gearslutz: https://www.gearslutz.com/board/electronic-music-instruments-electronic-music-production/979461-prophet-12-modulus-002-comparable.html?highlight=prophet+12+modulus+002+comparable (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/electronic-music-instruments-electronic-music-production/979461-prophet-12-modulus-002-comparable.html?highlight=prophet+12+modulus+002+comparable)
And there are other 002 threads, where the Prophet 12 has been brought up too.
Yes, I'd read some of that before. I was thinking more of a toe-to-to type comparison - not combative, but exacting.
-
I think an interesting contest could be had between the Prophet 12 and the 002. The designers and owners of both boast that these instruments and their digital oscillators have achieved sonic wonders that make analog oscillators blush. I would love to see and hear the two parties compare their instruments. And if one excels in some way or another, I'd like to understand exactly why that is. The discussion would obviously come down to much filter talk, but again, I'd like to follow it.
I'm not sure the comparison would be completely fair... I mean you're talking about a $3000 machine vs a $5000 machine.
However, for $5000, you could have a P12 and a P12 module... now that would be an interesting comparison.
True. But the P12 and 002 are the two popular and somewhat reasonably-priced large scale poly synths these days. I'm sure many people have been trying to chose between one or the other.
-
True. But the P12 and 002 are the two popular and somewhat reasonably-priced large scale poly synths these days. I'm sure many people have been trying to chose between one or the other.
You called the 002 "somewhat reasonably-priced"? I need YOUR money! :)
Seriously though, I know you're thinking about a P12 and TWO Prophet 08 modules.....
-
Very funny. I presently have no money for synthesizers, thanks to a deer friend. The 002 is "reasonable" only compared to instruments like the Schmidt, which is more or less the next step up from Modal Electronics.
-
Very funny. I presently have no money for synthesizers, thanks to a deer friend. The 002 is "reasonable" only compared to instruments like the Schmidt, which is more or less the next step up from Modal Electronics.
For the Schmidt money ($20k), I would pay Tom to make me an Oberheim 8 voice... And have money left over for a 008 and a 002.
-
For the price of a Schmidt, you could put a down payment on a small house! Even if I had such disposable income, I would never spend so much money on an instrument. My whole set up is worth only half of the price tag.
-
For the price of a Schmidt, you could put a down payment on a small house! Even if I had such disposable income, I would never spend so much money on an instrument. My whole set up is worth only half of the price tag.
No doubt.
-
Maybe I'll just save up for an Andromeda... You can negotiate them down to $2500 or so on eBay / Reverb.....
-
Be careful. They've got a number of bugs, parts are getting rare, and who can repair it when it develops problems? Gee, you've got a Prophet 12. What do you need an A6 for?
-
Be careful. They've got a number of bugs, parts are getting rare, and who can repair it when it develops problems? Gee, you've got a Prophet 12. What do you need an A6 for?
You're more than right.... that was just the GAS talking. ???
-
I understand. Well, you should feel a little better now. :o
-
I understand. Well, you should feel a little better now. :o
MUCH!!!
Thank you!
-
I must confess to you that several years ago, when I was considering an Andromeda myself, this gorgeous picture would practically keep me awake at night. It's obviously been doctored, but, wow, what a dream machine.
-
What about John Bowen's Solaris?
-
That's a possibility. Presently, this is the only version of the Solaris I can afford:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/272328186670?lpid=82&chn=ps&ul_noapp=true
-
...Haha. Yes, we could even get two at that price.
It's a beauty of an instrument, but wouldn't it bother you that the Solaris is digital?
-
Obviously, I'm an analog guy, and I did like the Andromeda's sound. I haven't actually played any modern digital synthesizers, so my judgments are based only on online demos. I'm not currently moved by the simple raw tone of anything these days. Nothing has struck me as being so much better than what I already have.
I had a Roland FP-4 digital piano a few years ago, and it had a decent selection of digital synthesizer pads. They were beautiful to play around with, but in time, I grew tired of them. Nor did they mix well with my analog synthesizers. So, yes, I would prefer to stay with analog.
-
It's a beauty of an instrument, but wouldn't it bother you that the Solaris is digital?
Why should it?
A good synth is a good synth irrespective of the technology.
You can do a lot of stuff on the Solaris that would be incredibly expensive or just impossible on analogue synths.
It should do very good analogue emulations but you can also do digital emulations and mix and match in a modular way.
I'm very curious to see how well it can emulate analogue synths, but it can go well beyond just emulations.
I'll hopefully find out, I should have a Solaris shortly :-D
-
Congratulations! I hope you'll post some samples here. I'd love to hear them.
-
Sorry about bringing back an old thread but no there is no current Andromeda and I sadly don't think we'll see it again, even from DSI. The Andromeda had bugs but it offered something almost no polysynth has ever offered: Multi-timbrality. Multiple splits and layers on the keys with multiple patches going at once and even multiple sequences at a single time. It was insanely powerful and flexible and it was analog. Literally an analog workstation that you could do everything from one single synth. I honestly think if DSI/Sequential were to bring out the Prophet 20 which would be a 20 voice, analog poly synth with the features of the Andromeda but the stability of a DSI product...it would blow everything else out of the water on the market....including their past synths.
Dave has never been interested in doing a synth that does it all and it is a bit mind numbing that in 2017 we are still thinking bi-timbrality in an analog synth is a big deal. It's a big gap missing in the market...I mean even just 4 part timbrality would be better than nothing....but DSI, Moog, Korg, everyone doesn't seem to care. Sad. I mean shoot, even a collaboration between DSI and Korg's ARP department in bringing back a modern Quadra would be something different.
I think there's a huge gap in the market because too many companies are focusing on polyphony instead of timbrality.
-
This is a great topic. Not to be a wise guy, but...the closest thing to an Andromeda A6 would be a three-unit Prophet '08 or a Rev2 keyboard-module pair.
-
This is a great topic. Not to be a wise guy, but...the closest thing to an Andromeda A6 would be a three-unit Prophet '08 or a Rev2 keyboard-module pair.
Yeah but still not all under the hood. I mean like listen to the Andromeda itself, it has it's own sound. It's hard to place but it's almost like a Jupiter 8/Quadra and CS-80 had a baby. There's something unique to it. Even the layout and image of it is incredible.
(http://synth4ever.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Alesis-Andromeda.jpg)
I honestly think the first company to come out with something similar could potentially flatten the market, especially if it's reasonably priced and you know...$3000-$5000 is reasonable for what it does.
-
DSI could certainly do this, but I doubt they want to devote the R&D to a product that will hardly sell -- it's simply out of most people's price range. And DSI is running a business after all.
Nice dream though.
-
It's true - there's nothing like an Andromeda. I had so wanted to buy one a few years ago, and I could have. I resisted over the obvious issues. But I'd gladly take an ARP Quadra instead!
-
DSI could certainly do this, but I doubt they want to devote the R&D to a product that will hardly sell -- it's simply out of most people's price range. And DSI is running a business after all.
Nice dream though.
They just did a 16 Voice Polyphonic for less than $3000. So...perhaps some of this "New technology" could help reduce costs.
-
the closest thing to an Andromeda A6 would be a three-unit Prophet '08 or a Rev2 keyboard-module pair.
Lately, I've thought of getting a couple of Oberheim Matrix 1000s and running them both through an Eventide Eclipse --- the Matrix 1000s were mono out, so a pair could be fed into the stereo inputs of the Eclipse either as "left and right" versions of the same patch, or two separate patches "glued" together by the Eclipse.
Random comment, I know, but your "three-unit Prophet '08 or a Rev2 keyboard-module pair" idea is in the same vein.
-
I understand. This stuff is addictive.
-
It's true - there's nothing like an Andromeda. I had so wanted to buy one a few years ago, and I could have. I resisted over the obvious issues. But I'd gladly take an ARP Quadra instead!
Hmm, that string sound, though, tends to cover everything in a sticky coating unless you leave the space for it in a mix–and, of course, there is no patch recall in the traditional sense. I've got a trio of ARP Omnis (1x mkI + 2x mkII) that are next on my slow-boat refurb list, so I'm definitely familiar with that timbre!
-
It's true - there's nothing like an Andromeda. I had so wanted to buy one a few years ago, and I could have. I resisted over the obvious issues. But I'd gladly take an ARP Quadra instead!
Hmm, that string sound, though, tends to cover everything in a sticky coating unless you leave the space for it in a mix–and, of course, there is no patch recall in the traditional sense. I've got a trio of ARP Omnis (1x mkI + 2x mkII) that are next on my slow-boat refurb list, so I'm definitely familiar with that timbre!
This is why I think it would be neat for Dave and Tatsuya Takahashi to do an updated Quadra with presets and fix the bugs.
-
I think an interesting contest could be had between the Prophet 12 and the 002. The designers and owners of both boast that these instruments and their digital oscillators have achieved sonic wonders that make analog oscillators blush. I would love to see and hear the two parties compare their instruments. And if one excels in some way or another, I'd like to understand exactly why that is. The discussion would obviously come down to much filter talk, but again, I'd like to follow it.
On the face of it you'd think they'd be quite similar given they are both digital oscillators into analogue filters, but you'd be wrong. They sound completely unlike each other.
Turns out they have completely different oscillators and completely different filters.
The P12 has mathematically generated waveforms that go into a DAC, the 002 uses NCOs that effectively speed up or slow down the DAC to generate different pitches.
The P12 has the well known Curtis filter, the 002 has a variable slope ladder (read Moog) filter.
The P12 is the more versatile of the two with all its mad modulations, but thats not to say the 002 is a slouch. It is also a very versatile synth.
They can both go from analogue to digital but the P12 can go further to a very pure digital, harsh if you want it.
The 002 has a more vintage digital sound, which has a different character, the only other synth I have like it is the Tempest with it's VS waves.
The P12 analogue side is similar to the P08 with better low end and the addition of drive. You can also do the same tricks as the P08 to get better sounds.
The 002 analogue side is ...beautiful. While many of the waveforms sound are obviously digital, the sawtooth just sounds like an analogue sawtooth. Put that through a ladder filter and you can't lose.
The 002 does have a strange output stage with 6 voices hard left, 6 hard right. It's easy to work around or even use creatively but a lot of people don't like it.
Tone wise I personally say the 002 wins. It just sounds so good, and does so pretty much all the time.
That's not to say the P12 is bad, it is also capable of some very good sounds.
Of course, both have their detractors, they both have their own character and not everyone likes them.
I like both and have no plans to get rid of either.
-
I think an interesting contest could be had between the Prophet 12 and the 002. The designers and owners of both boast that these instruments and their digital oscillators have achieved sonic wonders that make analog oscillators blush. I would love to see and hear the two parties compare their instruments. And if one excels in some way or another, I'd like to understand exactly why that is. The discussion would obviously come down to much filter talk, but again, I'd like to follow it.
On the face of it you'd think they'd be quite similar given they are both digital oscillators into analogue filters, but you'd be wrong. They sound completely unlike each other.
I second this. They're both complementary to each other. It's like comparing a Minimoog to a Two Voice Pro; that's pretty much how different they are in terms of sound and features.
-
I'd say the Modal Electronics 008 is the closest thing to a single-instrument new Andromeda A6. I realize there is a difference in voice counts, but still. The 008 seems to be the biggest mightiest single unit polyphonic instrument available that is priced somewhat within the range of a synthesist with some resources (bye-bye Schmidt).
The tantalizing question is, will DSI ever enter this level of powerful synthesis at which a certain sonic character is absolutely essential, together with sophistication? This would probably require a second Sequential instrument, something with the sound of the Prophet-6 but the sophistication of the Prophet 12. Would DSI pass that scary $3,000 mark to produce it? I think it's possible. But with Dave's Rev2 comments about 'modern and less expensive technology,' perhaps it wouldn't be too far beyond that price. Besides, I believe the Andromeda sold for $3,000.
I would love to see DSI take the daring step and surpass the P12 with a comparable VCA synthesizer. I've been saying this for years, but I'm still optimistic.
-
I'd say the Modal Electronics 008 is the closest thing to a single-instrument new Andromeda A6. I realize there is a difference in voice counts, but still. The 008 seems to be the biggest strongest single unit polyphonic instrument available that is priced somewhat within the range of a synthesist with some resources.
The filter section is quite powerful. One has to tinker around with it in person though, otherwise it may not be that obvious.
-
Paul, have you played an 008? I'm wondering about the keyboard quality. I presume it's excellent.
-
I'd say the Modal Electronics 008 is the closest thing to a single-instrument new Andromeda A6. I realize there is a difference in voice counts, but still. The 008 seems to be the biggest mightiest single unit polyphonic instrument available that is priced somewhat within the range of a synthesist with some resources (bye-bye Schmidt).
The tantalizing question is, will DSI ever enter this level of powerful synthesis at which a certain sonic character is absolutely essential, together with sophistication? This would probably require a second Sequential instrument, something with the sound of the Prophet-6 but the sophistication of the Prophet 12. Would DSI pass that scary $3,000 mark to produce it? I think it's possible. But with Dave's Rev2 comments about 'modern and less expensive technology,' perhaps it wouldn't be too far beyond that price. Besides, I believe the Andromeda sold for $3,000.
I would love to see DSI take the daring step and surpass the P12 with a comparable VCA synthesizer. I've been saying this for years, but I'm still optimistic.
Interesting perspective–in some respects, the Modal units (001/002 family and 008) surpass the Andromeda as regards (single-instance) filter flexibility, yet the Alesis unit remains king by virtue of modulation flexibility and raw voice / part count (neglecting built-in effects, which were also pretty decent on the Andromeda).
So even across multiple manufacturers, one is still left with the perception that one can have X or Y, or partial compositions thereof, but not all of X + Y within a single current product offering, regardless of manufacturer(s).
-
Paul, have you played an 008? I'm wondering about the keyboard quality. I presume it's excellent.
Twice actually. But at Superbooth I had the chance to play it more extensively with some developers around. The filter really features some unique combinations. Sonically, that stood out most to me. And I liked the fact that you can use the animator and the sequencer at the same time.
The keyboard quality is excellent. I believe it's a Fatar as well.
-
I haven't played the Rev 2 yet, but I'm hoping its improved keyboard quality will be the new standard in future DSI synthesizers. How would you rate the Rev2's keyboard compared with that of the 008?
-
I haven't played the Rev 2 yet, but I'm hoping its improved keyboard quality will be the new standard in future DSI synthesizers. How would you rate the Rev2's keyboard compared with that of the 008?
I couldn't compare both side by side, but I'd say that they feel equally good. The REV2 keyboard is definitely an improvement.
-
That's good enough for me! I'm glad to know this.
-
After one month of working with this masterpiece, I'm confidently placing my vote. The Prophet 12 is the new Andromeda A6. Yes, there is some competition for this status, but only if you make the price tag a non-factor. Within the $3,000 range, the P12 is definitely the winner.
-
After one month of working with this masterpiece, I'm confidently placing my vote. The Prophet 12 is the new Andromeda A6. Yes, there is some competition for this status, but only if you make the price tag a non-factor. Within the $3,000 range, the P12 is definitely the winner.
Hey, congratulations! It's about time!
-
Thanks!
-
I'm sorry but comparing the P12 to the Andromeda isn't even a competition. The P12 is a Digital/analog bi timbral hybrid. The Andromeda is a multimbral 16 voice analog synth with loads more features.
Can the P12 have 16 different sequences and patches running at once?
-
To a degree, I agree with you. When I say the Prophet 12 is the new Andromeda, just as when I posed the original question, I'm speaking in general. Obviously, no instrument is going to exactly match the A6, just as no instrument is going to exactly match the P12. They are two distinct instruments from two distinct eras. But in general, for impressive polyphony and complexity, I think the two are in the same league. And best of all, the P12 is in production and being maintained, which is far more than could have been said for Alesis and the A6. That's the primary reason I never bought one.
So, for those of us who can't swing a bill bigger than $3,000, the P12 is a very impressive possibility, whereas, the large Modal Electronics instruments are out of the question, even though you might find their synthesizers to be better matches for the Andromeda.
-
And best of all, the P12 is in production and being maintained, which is far more than could have been said for Alesis. That's the primary reason I never bought an A6.
+1
I came so close to picking up an Andromeda a couple years ago, but I read one too many (or perhaps, one enough) stories about folks trying to get the damned thing fixed.
AND I would add this... I'll trust DSI build quality over Alesis any time. I've owned enough Alesis kit over the years, and it's fair to say that build quality was never their forté.
TRUE, they both cover sonic ground that the other can't approach. That can be said about any 2 synths. And there will never be another A6 (unless U-he sets their sights on it).
-
Exactly. I, too, had the money in my hand to buy an A6, but, due to the issues, I decided instead to make an eight-voice Poly Evolver Keyboard. It was some consolation, but still, there's a sense that a classic was missed.
-
And best of all, the P12 is in production and being maintained, which is far more than could have been said for Alesis. That's the primary reason I never bought an A6.
+1
I came so close to picking up an Andromeda a couple years ago, but I read one too many (or perhaps, one enough) stories about folks trying to get the damned thing fixed.
AND I would add this... I'll trust DSI build quality over Alesis any time. I've owned enough Alesis kit over the years, and it's fair to say that build quality was never their forté.
TRUE, they both cover sonic ground that the other can't approach. That can be said about any 2 synths. And there will never be another A6 (unless U-he sets their sights on it).
It's worth pointing out that many of the old Sequential units can still be serviced, even after 30+ years, provided that you can score the necessary parts, where scarce.
And in spite of owning an eight-voice 002 rack unit, I am still strongly considering a Prophet-12 (keyboard version if I can swing it). They're different enough that I don't feel that a dive into an under-supported, modern-vintage analogue polysynth is warranted any more.
-
I don't know what else DSI can do in the analog realm that'll be mind blowing except for multitimbrality...I'd love to see Dave tackle that....not sure he would though. I just feel anything else is redundant at this point when it comes to analog. Probably why I didn't go for an OB6 or Deep Mind 12...it's just a mono timbral analog synth with very little difference to my Prophet 6. I'll probably go for a Rev2 at some point just cause it's different but even still...duo timbrality has been done decades ago...let's move on.
-
I don't know what else DSI can do in the analog realm that'll be mind blowing except for multitimbrality...I'd love to see Dave tackle that....not sure he would though. I just feel anything else is redundant at this point when it comes to analog. Probably why I didn't go for an OB6 or Deep Mind 12...it's just a mono timbral analog synth with very little difference to my Prophet 6. I'll probably go for a Rev2 at some point just cause it's different but even still...duo timbrality has been done decades ago...let's move on.
I used to think the same way about multi-timbrality, though it's tough to do well without a more elaborate MIDI master keyboard controller framework (like the Ensoniq stuff had, but that the DSI synths lack). I'd rather see split/layer done well than multitimbral done poorly. (I'd guess that the Tempest falls into the multitimbral category, but lacks the need for keyboard zone mapping.)
-
I think more could be gotten out of split capability if the musician could allocate the number of voices per side, rather than always have the instrument divide the voices evenly. In the case of the Prophet 12, then you could have ten voices on the left for accompaniment, and two on the right for melody. The same could be true for layers. For example, if you were playing chord progressions, the top line of which comprised your melody, then a second layer set to top note priority could be used to follow and emphasize the melody and add color to it. In other words, there's still more to be exploited from in bi-timbrality.
-
I think more could be gotten out of split capability if the musician could allocate the number of voices per side, rather than always have the instrument divide the voices evenly. In the case of the Prophet 12, then you could have ten voices on the left for accompaniment, and two on the right for melody. The same could be true for layers. For example, if you were playing chord progressions, the top line of which comprised your melody, then a second layer set to top note priority could be used to follow and emphasize the melody and add color to it. In other words, there's still more to be exploited from in bi-timbrality.
The six-voice case has been done, as early as the dawn of MIDI:
(http://www.synthmania.com/Roland%20Jupiter-6/Images/Roland%20Jupiter-6%20002.JPG)
and to a more sophisticated extent, in the Oberheim Matrix-6/6R: http://www.cyborgstudio.com/synthmp3s/oberheim/matrix6/manual/matrix6ownersmanual.pdf, p.74
An expert mode for keyboard range / voice re-assignment would definitely be a plus; I understand the desire to keep as many operating parameters as superficial as possible, yet there are cases where users can be trusted to make their own decisions.
-
I don't know what else DSI can do in the analog realm that'll be mind blowing except for multitimbrality...I'd love to see Dave tackle that....not sure he would though. I just feel anything else is redundant at this point when it comes to analog. Probably why I didn't go for an OB6 or Deep Mind 12...it's just a mono timbral analog synth with very little difference to my Prophet 6. I'll probably go for a Rev2 at some point just cause it's different but even still...duo timbrality has been done decades ago...let's move on.
I used to think the same way about multi-timbrality, though it's tough to do well without a more elaborate MIDI master keyboard controller framework (like the Ensoniq stuff had, but that the DSI synths lack). I'd rather see split/layer done well than multitimbral done poorly. (I'd guess that the Tempest falls into the multitimbral category, but lacks the need for keyboard zone mapping.)
I understand that but I'd rather see something all under the hood. I just never understood how it's possible that vintage synths could have more features and capability than newer ones.
-
I don't know what else DSI can do in the analog realm that'll be mind blowing except for multitimbrality...I'd love to see Dave tackle that....not sure he would though. I just feel anything else is redundant at this point when it comes to analog. Probably why I didn't go for an OB6 or Deep Mind 12...it's just a mono timbral analog synth with very little difference to my Prophet 6. I'll probably go for a Rev2 at some point just cause it's different but even still...duo timbrality has been done decades ago...let's move on.
I used to think the same way about multi-timbrality, though it's tough to do well without a more elaborate MIDI master keyboard controller framework (like the Ensoniq stuff had, but that the DSI synths lack). I'd rather see split/layer done well than multitimbral done poorly. (I'd guess that the Tempest falls into the multitimbral category, but lacks the need for keyboard zone mapping.)
I understand that but I'd rather see something all under the hood. I just never understood how it's possible that vintage synths could have more features and capability than newer ones.
I don't think it's about features and capability, per se, but more about usability. The Poly Evolver is a perfect example of that which can go wrong with a multitimbral implementation; the Tempest, on the other hand, works quite well (in its guise as a drum machine).
I don't think we'll see another A6, largely because it was a failure outside of its niche (setting aside its sound-generation technology). And I'd say that the Waldorf Q was equally guilty of the same issues (even though it was a DSP-based, virtual-analogue instrument); both suffered from a lack of a well-designed polyphonic sketchpad sequencer, a feature that would appeal to musicians across a broader range of genres and styles than, say, arpeggiators / step sequencers of a particular opinionated bent.
Barring that sketchpad functionality, the additional parts would probably be underutilized by most players (or could easily be accommodated instead by using external sound sources, pointing back towards my remark about master controller functionality being a fundamental requirement).
-
I don't know what else DSI can do in the analog realm that'll be mind blowing except for multitimbrality...I'd love to see Dave tackle that....not sure he would though. I just feel anything else is redundant at this point when it comes to analog. Probably why I didn't go for an OB6 or Deep Mind 12...it's just a mono timbral analog synth with very little difference to my Prophet 6. I'll probably go for a Rev2 at some point just cause it's different but even still...duo timbrality has been done decades ago...let's move on.
I used to think the same way about multi-timbrality, though it's tough to do well without a more elaborate MIDI master keyboard controller framework (like the Ensoniq stuff had, but that the DSI synths lack). I'd rather see split/layer done well than multitimbral done poorly. (I'd guess that the Tempest falls into the multitimbral category, but lacks the need for keyboard zone mapping.)
I understand that but I'd rather see something all under the hood. I just never understood how it's possible that vintage synths could have more features and capability than newer ones.
I don't think it's about features and capability, per se, but more about usability. The Poly Evolver is a perfect example of that which can go wrong with a multitimbral implementation; the Tempest, on the other hand, works quite well (in its guise as a drum machine).
I don't think we'll see another A6, largely because it was a failure outside of its niche (setting aside its sound-generation technology). And I'd say that the Waldorf Q was equally guilty of the same issues (even though it was a DSP-based, virtual-analogue instrument); both suffered from a lack of a well-designed polyphonic sketchpad sequencer, a feature that would appeal to musicians across a broader range of genres and styles than, say, arpeggiators / step sequencers of a particular opinionated bent.
Barring that sketchpad functionality, the additional parts would probably be underutilized by most players (or could easily be accommodated instead by using external sound sources, pointing back towards my remark about master controller functionality being a fundamental requirement).
I'd still like more than one split point though...even if it's only four patches at once...it's at least something fresh. This is why I'd love to see the idea of the PEK or Tempest synth engine in a new synth and expanded on. Two analog oscillators, two digital oscillators with FM capabilities, VS waves and sampling capabilities. Either samples from the old Prophet 2000 or the ability to import your own samples via an editor. Have the ability to have 4 zones or stack four layers, sequencer on each and call it the Prophet X. In reference to crossing over different types of synthesis.
-
I've never read or heard this, but somehow I get the impression that Dave's answer to multi-timbrality is "get another synth".
In a way, that makes sense. Multi-timbrality with 1 synth engine duplicated 2, 3 or 4 times may not be as interesting as 2, 3 or 4 synth engines layered.
-
And that's the course I've followed. The more an instrument's multi-timbrality increases, the smaller it becomes. That's why I'm content with bi-timbrality and much prefer to pair keyboard and module versions. It's expensive, alright, but it's the best way to get an immense sound and yet maintain polyphony.
-
I'd still like more than one split point though...even if it's only four patches at once...it's at least something fresh. This is why I'd love to see the idea of the PEK or Tempest synth engine in a new synth and expanded on. Two analog oscillators, two digital oscillators with FM capabilities, VS waves and sampling capabilities. Either samples from the old Prophet 2000 or the ability to import your own samples via an editor. Have the ability to have 4 zones or stack four layers, sequencer on each and call it the Prophet X. In reference to crossing over different types of synthesis.
That's not a bad idea at all (said the guy with a Prophet 2000).
Consider the ARP Quadra in its time: bass mono, lead mono, strings and polyphony in one package; I think that four parts is just about right. If they're configurable to be spread over two internal + two external parts, with a Mix Input much like the Poly Evolver Rack, that'd be a nice setup (say, along the lines of a Prophet-12 + REV2 desktop).
That said–I suspect that once you add more parts, keyboard real estate starts to become a consideration. I'm not sure that DSI wants to get back into the large-format controller keyboard business* (in spite of the Prophet-T8's keybed), but there are 76-note A-C span synthesizer keybeds available through their existing supplier channels.
* - Without projecting my own history onto others, I can definitely relate to a dual-manual 61-key + pedalboard worldview, where timbres might split or layer themselves somewhere in the middle of the key range. But I doubt that we'd ever see something like the Prophet-10 again, perhaps for our own good.
-
I've never read or heard this, but somehow I get the impression that Dave's answer to multi-timbrality is "get another synth".
In a way, that makes sense. Multi-timbrality with 1 synth engine duplicated 2, 3 or 4 times may not be as interesting as 2, 3 or 4 synth engines layered.
Yep - guilty as charged. There's something to be said for layering multiple distinct sound sources across one keyboard surface (the MIDI kids!), provided that you don't end up with "00 Piano+strgz1"-style cliches.
-
I'd still like more than one split point though...even if it's only four patches at once...it's at least something fresh. This is why I'd love to see the idea of the PEK or Tempest synth engine in a new synth and expanded on. Two analog oscillators, two digital oscillators with FM capabilities, VS waves and sampling capabilities. Either samples from the old Prophet 2000 or the ability to import your own samples via an editor. Have the ability to have 4 zones or stack four layers, sequencer on each and call it the Prophet X. In reference to crossing over different types of synthesis.
That's not a bad idea at all (said the guy with a Prophet 2000).
Consider the ARP Quadra in its time: bass mono, lead mono, strings and polyphony in one package; I think that four parts is just about right. If they're configurable to be spread over two internal + two external parts, with a Mix Input much like the Poly Evolver Rack, that'd be a nice setup (say, along the lines of a Prophet-12 + REV2 desktop).
That said–I suspect that once you add more parts, keyboard real estate starts to become a consideration. I'm not sure that DSI wants to get back into the large-format controller keyboard business* (in spite of the Prophet-T8's keybed), but there are 76-note A-C span synthesizer keybeds available through their existing supplier channels.
* - Without projecting my own history onto others, I can definitely relate to a dual-manual 61-key + pedalboard worldview, where timbres might split or layer themselves somewhere in the middle of the key range. But I doubt that we'd ever see something like the Prophet-10 again, perhaps for our own good.
The design of the Quadra proves you don't need a massive amount of real estate....even just have four OLED Displays on each section. However, I would prefer they ditch doing that and just stick to the P6/OB6 layout with numbers and no menu. Everything on the front. In fact that's where I think the REV2 design lacked. Simply take two module size panels and place them side by side with some knobs and buttons in the middle for (Mix, Split, Layer, Assign, Destination). That way both parts can be accessed at once and you also have random patch access on each.
With a Quadra type synth...just do two rows of modules side by side. I'm not sure how much real estate it would take up but I don't think it would be ridiculously massive.