The Official Sequential/Oberheim Forum
OBERHEIM => OB-X8 => Topic started by: purling on May 10, 2022, 10:19:58 AM
-
What a fantastic instrument - it's a beautiful evolution. Congratulations to the whole team and all the best.
:)
-
It looks like the arpeggiator only has up and down directions is that true?
-
It looks like the arpeggiator only has up and down directions is that true?
From the arp section of the product tour:
Arpeggiator
Use the arpeggiator to create chord-based rhythmic patterns. Hold down several notes and the arpeggiator will cycle through them at the rate that you set and a pattern that you choose: up, down, up & down, or note order played. You can transpose the arpeggio up or down an octave and apply it to one or both parts in a split or double. All of the innovative arpeggiator functions of the OB-8 are built into the OB-X8.
-
It looks like the arpeggiator only has up and down directions is that true?
From the arp section of the product tour:
Arpeggiator
Use the arpeggiator to create chord-based rhythmic patterns. Hold down several notes and the arpeggiator will cycle through them at the rate that you set and a pattern that you choose: up, down, up & down, or note order played. You can transpose the arpeggio up or down an octave and apply it to one or both parts in a split or double. All of the innovative arpeggiator functions of the OB-8 are built into the OB-X8.
I was also told on facebook it has Random as well when both buttons are turned off.
-
This is glorious news. I've already left a message with my retailer about getting one in Toronto. I may actually sell my OB-8 for this.
-
Starting price in Germany will be 5699,00€ ... well... that is a lot of money...
-
Starting price in Germany will be 5699,00€ ... well... that is a lot of money...
About $7K for us Canucks.
-
To be honest, the OBX8 is really want I wish the P5/10 reissues were. Taking a classic and pushing it forward. The reissues just seem like a small inch forward compared to the OBX8's features.
-
How so? The P5/P10 included objectively *more* new features than their predecessors, while the OB-X8 is more of a faithful recreation of several old instruments but combined into one. The Prophets are the ones with new stuff!
-
I agree, the Prophet Rev 4 additions were well thought out and with stacks, 10 voices, pu2 etc were 'vast' improvements over the originals while the OB-X8 (great as it is) is LIKE the originals but all in one (obv with velo/aftertouch and patch naming + some nice new toys).
It seems the features are a little higher on the OBX8 but the overall 'wow' factor for me remains with the Prophet 10 rev 4, partly because it's still the best looking polysynth of all time but mainly the overall tone, richness and depth of sound (even vs old OBIES).
I mean nothing touches the Prophet 5/10 for all time classic good looks, and OB-X8 does kinda look a bit rudimentary (if retro and cool itself) by comparison. I do wonder if they'd have been better going with the Blue-stripes look which became the iconic OBIE style, even IF they were trying to mainly potray the more desirable sound of the original OB-X. It still looks good but it lacks the flair of the Prophet rev 4s visually, and I think Blue stripes would make sense if it was technically an OB sucessor 4 - post blue stripes phase with all the bits from the 3 synths instead of a straight OB-X re-issue.
Now the new OB-X8 sounds great, definitely has the vintage thing in spades and makes the OB-6 sound more mushy and flat (which is kind of what I thought about mine in the end anyway - esp next to my Prophet 10), but the OB-6's features + tone are still great if you can find a cheap one (MSRP now is stupid on it).
OB-X8 tone wise? It's there.. but I guess I just prefer the Prophet 5/10 sound because I can hear similarities in some demos but when, for example, the OB-X8 is trying to do bass - the prophet rev 4 blows it away (it sounds more hollow on the OB-X8 but that could be down to programmer error not using 4 pole mode on the CEM?), other sounds all kinda sound a bit samey (like the OB-6 does too) in that it's less varied and dynamic sounding vs the Prophet rev 4... there were sounds in the new demos I know for sure would sound better on the Prophet 10, with more warmth, more clarity between notes, more richness and possibly emotion.
Conversely the OB-X8 will excel at stuff the Prophet doesn't do, bandpass sweeps and lighter frothy pads, it may also sound a touch duller than the prophets but more watery... smoother (this can be good or bad but in that respect I think the Prophets sound more 'analog' at least). OB-X8 may sound more vintage but less powerful/analog vs Prophet 10.
Factor in 2 more voices and classic beautiful looks and to me at least the Prophet 10 (or 5) remain king of the hill, esp for expensive synths where it may be your main / only 'go to' workhorse. More than that, from what I've heard so far, I just prefer the Prophet rev 4's overall tone, depth and power.. something about how the voices are more clearly defined and esp the SSM (SSI) 2040 filter giving a tone I just love to the Prophet. I guess with both in CEM 3320 mode they could be similar, VCO diffs aside... so it comes down to a degree of flavours... and do I really need it to go with my Prophet? hmmm...
I didn't need my OB-6 so in reality I doubt I NEED this but it would be nice, for under £4k I'd have probably JUMPED (pun intended) but at nearer £5k It's not grabbing me as much as the Prophet 10 did for a lot cheaper.
Also I love PU2 and stack mode on the Prophet 10 now, it's not just about 2 diff sounds layered - like we could multitrack - but coming up with weird mixes between them like a 4 osc synth (or 3 + sub) and the way the velocity interacts on the layers... its an art in itself and a massive strong point of the Prophet 10 rev 4 over the old Prophet 5 (which couldn't do it) and the new prophet 5 (cos of limited polyphony) so with OB-X8 I can't help but feel that 'loss' of those 2 extra voices... 4 note poly is pushing it a bit too much for me, in layered mode, esp for such an expensive synth I'd want it to be an 'everything' machine. 12 voices for this price might have been cool, but 10 would have at least matched the P10 if you're charging £1k more.
Not having a go, I think it's a wonderful machine and I'd love one, but with the Prophet 10 already out there... I honestly believe it's a more powerful SOUNDING and powerful workhorse synth that can sound just as beautiful and epic but also darker, punchier, more evil, more brooding and far more varied in tonality and types of sounds.
This is not a knock on the OB-X8 more a vote for how awesome the Rev 4 Prophet 10 is. You could get an OB-6 module used + a Prophet 10 new for LESS than the OB-X8 which really puts it in perspective too. Not that I really need an OB-6 back again.
Either way, congratz on the new synth Tom & Dave. Can't wait to see what other Oberheim toys we get!
-
First Demos are already there...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OajB5WUMa1M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEAoJDq7pTk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3VdWgvOVeY
-
How so? The P5/P10 included objectively *more* new features than their predecessors, while the OB-X8 is more of a faithful recreation of several old instruments but combined into one. The Prophets are the ones with new stuff!
Eh, aftertouch and velocity at this point on a synth should be as commonplace as MIDI. I wouldn't really consider them "more features" to be honest.
The OBX8 from my understanding has more memory, an OLED screen (not a deal breaker but still it's welcomed), dedicated bi timbrality section (as opposed to some button configurations), arpeggiator (I would have liked to have seen the Poly sequencer on the P5/P10 myself. Overall it just feels like the OBX8 is more of a "next step" rather than a reissue with some modern capabilities. That's just me though.
-
How so? The P5/P10 included objectively *more* new features than their predecessors, while the OB-X8 is more of a faithful recreation of several old instruments but combined into one. The Prophets are the ones with new stuff!
I think some folks overlook the bi-timbrality, split, my personal favorite poly unison, etc., effectively capturing a lot of what made the Jupiter 8 popular. It's easy to be deceived by that the implied simplicity of that beautiful, spartan looking wooden case. I think my P10 will always be my primary keyboard, and the one I gravitate to for song writing inspiration. Still getting an OB-X8 though, no doubt about it. When will the desktop version be released?
-
The OBX8 from my understanding has more memory, an OLED screen (not a deal breaker but still it's welcomed), dedicated bi timbrality section (as opposed to some button configurations), arpeggiator (I would have liked to have seen the Poly sequencer on the P5/P10 myself. Overall it just feels like the OBX8 is more of a "next step" rather than a reissue with some modern capabilities. That's just me though.
I have a Keystep Pro right next to my P10 that I use to arp/sequence 3 of my other synths at once (it could be 4 but I use the first track in drum mode). It's hard to go back to onboard arps and sequencers with all the capabilities it has. Highly recommended. And the fact that you can quickly save your patterns as a project.. the workflow is brilliant. Even the arp on the Access Virus software is crazy flexible, but I still find myself wanting to arp it from the Keystep. So for me arp and sequence on a synth are kind of a lukewarm, nice to have thing. Core tone is way more important to me.
-
The OBX8 from my understanding has more memory, an OLED screen (not a deal breaker but still it's welcomed), dedicated bi timbrality section (as opposed to some button configurations), arpeggiator (I would have liked to have seen the Poly sequencer on the P5/P10 myself. Overall it just feels like the OBX8 is more of a "next step" rather than a reissue with some modern capabilities. That's just me though.
I have a Keystep Pro right next to my P10 that I use to arp/sequence 3 of my other synths at once (it could be 4 but I use the first track in drum mode). It's hard to go back to onboard arps and sequencers with all the capabilities it has. Highly recommended. And the fact that you can quickly save your patterns as a project.. the workflow is brilliant. Even the arp on the Access Virus software is crazy flexible, but I still find myself wanting to arp it from the Keystep. So for me arp and sequence on a synth are kind of a lukewarm, nice to have thing. Core tone is way more important to me.
I don't think I'd use the keystep on a poly synth. Mono synths yes but I'd rather have a poly synth with arpeggiators and sequencers, however basic, on board. Especially at these price points. Having no onboard effects is already pushing it for a $6-7K synth.
-
The OBX8 from my understanding has more memory, an OLED screen (not a deal breaker but still it's welcomed), dedicated bi timbrality section (as opposed to some button configurations), arpeggiator (I would have liked to have seen the Poly sequencer on the P5/P10 myself. Overall it just feels like the OBX8 is more of a "next step" rather than a reissue with some modern capabilities. That's just me though.
I have a Keystep Pro right next to my P10 that I use to arp/sequence 3 of my other synths at once (it could be 4 but I use the first track in drum mode). It's hard to go back to onboard arps and sequencers with all the capabilities it has. Highly recommended. And the fact that you can quickly save your patterns as a project.. the workflow is brilliant. Even the arp on the Access Virus software is crazy flexible, but I still find myself wanting to arp it from the Keystep. So for me arp and sequence on a synth are kind of a lukewarm, nice to have thing. Core tone is way more important to me.
I don't think I'd use the keystep on a poly synth. Mono synths yes but I'd rather have a poly synth with arpeggiators and sequencers, however basic, on board. Especially at these price points. Having no onboard effects is already pushing it for a $6-7K synth.
The KS Pro model is 16 voice polyphonic, so no issues there. If you mean the mini-keys, I've come to like them more than I ever thought I would, for sequence input -- it sort of looks like a cheap plastic POS in photos but its actually a very well built piece of gear. I do sometimes send the MIDI notes from a larger 61 key board into the KS instead of using the minikeys on the KS itself, so that's always an option.. in fact that may be how I end up using it the most with the OB-X8 desktop when I get it, because I see myself using split mode quite a bit and would like 5 octaves for that. One of the great things about the KS is being able to do stuff with the arp/sequence that's going to be either cumbersome or impossible with most built-in arp/seq features. Like quickly turning on and off notes within a 4 bar pattern, changing the gate length or pitch of individual notes, shifting and inverting the pattern, randomization/swing, etc.
That said, I like that there is some arp/seq capability built into the OB-X8, because there is definitely a use case for storing the pattern with the patch.
-
The OBX8 from my understanding has more memory, an OLED screen (not a deal breaker but still it's welcomed), dedicated bi timbrality section (as opposed to some button configurations), arpeggiator (I would have liked to have seen the Poly sequencer on the P5/P10 myself. Overall it just feels like the OBX8 is more of a "next step" rather than a reissue with some modern capabilities. That's just me though.
I have a Keystep Pro right next to my P10 that I use to arp/sequence 3 of my other synths at once (it could be 4 but I use the first track in drum mode). It's hard to go back to onboard arps and sequencers with all the capabilities it has. Highly recommended. And the fact that you can quickly save your patterns as a project.. the workflow is brilliant. Even the arp on the Access Virus software is crazy flexible, but I still find myself wanting to arp it from the Keystep. So for me arp and sequence on a synth are kind of a lukewarm, nice to have thing. Core tone is way more important to me.
I don't think I'd use the keystep on a poly synth. Mono synths yes but I'd rather have a poly synth with arpeggiators and sequencers, however basic, on board. Especially at these price points. Having no onboard effects is already pushing it for a $6-7K synth.
The KS Pro model is 16 voice polyphonic, so no issues there. If you mean the mini-keys, I've come to like them more than I ever thought I would, for sequence input -- it sort of looks like a cheap plastic POS in photos but its actually a very well built piece of gear. I do sometimes send the MIDI notes from a larger 61 key board into the KS instead of using the minikeys on the KS itself, so that's always an option.. in fact that may be how I end up using it the most with the OB-X8 desktop when I get it, because I see myself using split mode quite a bit and would like 5 octaves for that. One of the great things about the KS is being able to do stuff with the arp/sequence that's going to be either cumbersome or impossible with most built-in arp/seq features. Like quickly turning on and off notes within a 4 bar pattern, changing the gate length or pitch of individual notes, shifting and inverting the pattern, randomization/swing, etc.
That said, I like that there is some arp/seq capability built into the OB-X8, because there is definitely a use case for storing the pattern with the patch.
I'm sure the KS is fantastic but for $4-6K, I'd rather have an onboard sequencer.
I guess what I'm saying, and after watching the most recent SonicState demonstration of the OBX8 is I wish the REV4 took the approach of "Compiling the best of the best and expanding on it and allowing it to go into new territories" rather than a straight reissue. I know someone is going to say "Well the vintage knob does that". Watch this video and understand what I mean...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KuKq-ECU9E
-
:-\Hyper speculative price, and when you know the possibilities offered by technology today, you understand that owning this model is not interesting. Just to say "I have it"... etc.
Yeah you can always talk.
OBX-8 is a way to take advantage of the naivety of nostalgia.
Without me anyway.
-
There are some sounds in the superbooth live video above that are better sounding to me than everything I have heard so far. I think this thing really sounds incredible. I also appreciate the improvements over the originals and the fact that you can combine things from different models for creating a whole new world of sounds. I first thought it was just the filter, but in this video he shows what features you can mix together.
Unfortunately, I didn't save up for my P10R4 yet. But since I have at least my Rev2 I will save a little longer and buy this thing instead. I always wanted to have a true Oberheim since I played a Matrix 12. The father of a friend of mine has never sold his and so I got to lay my hands on it one or the other time. Listening to all demos of OB-X/a, etc. I still think I like the sound of the older models more. Architecture-wise my Rev2 is Matrix-12 enough for me. So it has to be the OB-X8 for me.
(I still want to have a P10, too. But all in all this two synth will cost me 10.000€. It will take some time... )
-
I guess what I'm saying, and after watching the most recent SonicState demonstration of the OBX8 is I wish the REV4 took the approach of "Compiling the best of the best and expanding on it and allowing it to go into new territories" rather than a straight reissue. I know someone is going to say "Well the vintage knob does that". Watch this video and understand what I mean...
Do you mean the fact that the OB-8 "Page 2" functionality can be used with the modes for OB-X and OB-Xa? If so, I agree this is very cool. However the OB-X/Xa/8 were all revisions of the same synth much in the way the Prophet 5 Rev 1/2/3 were. And since these page 2 capabilities were a part of the original OB-X product line, and not a part of the Prophet product line, I think that the inclusion of the parameters for the OB-X8 makes a lot of sense. If they threw a digital oscillator or two into the OB-X8 or something like that, then we would end up with the OB-X8 losing it's identity as a musical instrument because now you would start getting sounds coming from it that are out of character.
I'm very thankful personally that the extra OB-8 functionality was included... Everyone involved probably realized it would have been uncool to release a OB-X/Xa combination and then later come out with an OB-8 as a separate product with many new features.
At the end of it all, I still see it as feature-matching the original vintage synth rather than adding so many new features that the vintage identity is lost. The Prophet 5 was invented many years before the OB-8 came along, so it has a notably more spartan feature set, yet the Rev4 still adds much the original did not have: Switchable filter, polyunison, stack/split, vintage knob, velocity/at/midi etc.
To me, if there is a standout new feature of the OB-X8, it's the display... and when a synth is becoming kind of the 3-in-1 that the OB-X8 is, a display starts to make more sense, but I actually love the lack of one on the Rev4... The simplicity of the Rev4 encourages the player to truly focus on the sound rather than the technology facilitating that sound, and this is why so many good sounds come out of the Prophet.
Ask anyone who owns both a Prophet 5/10 (vintage or rev 4) and an OB-X/Xa/8 the proverbial question -- imagine your home is on fire and you only have time to rescue one of your synths from the flames... which of the two do you carry out of the fire? The number of people I've known that answered they'd save the Prophet outnumbered the Obie by about 10:1. There is a reason the Prophet is considered the greatest poly of all time.
That said, the OB-X8 is a dream synth in its own right, and hopefully the desktop will be announced in next couple of months so that they can take my money!
-
:-\Hyper speculative price, and when you know the possibilities offered by technology today, you understand that owning this model is not interesting. Just to say "I have it"... etc.
Yeah you can always talk.
OBX-8 is a way to take advantage of the naivety of nostalgia.
Without me anyway.
I'd suggest that any nostalgia at work here - both in the creation of the new OBX-8 and in the desire to own one - isn't naive in the least! It's with full awareness. There's nothing wrong with nostalgia, anyway. That Tom and Dave are very much still with us and are seemingly delighted to honor their own legacies is nothing but a good thing, and not only are they speaking to their own histories, but they're acknowledging that instruments they created decades ago still inspire people today.
I just can't see anyone being duped into spending $5000 in a haze of "I wish I was that doctor guy in Prince's band..." One kinda has to be pretty awake to take that amount from a bank account!
-
I just can't see anyone being duped into spending $5000 in a haze of "I wish I was that doctor guy in Prince's band..." One kinda has to be pretty awake to take that amount from a bank account!
It's a pricey synth to be sure, especially one that didn't have the sonic reach of Prophet.. but I think $3.3k for a desktop is not too out of line with what similar VCO synths are going for, so hopefully I won't be disappointed when the (IMHO inevitable) announcement comes.
-
:-\Hyper speculative price, and when you know the possibilities offered by technology today, you understand that owning this model is not interesting. Just to say "I have it"... etc.
Yeah you can always talk.
OBX-8 is a way to take advantage of the naivety of nostalgia.
Without me anyway.
I'd suggest that any nostalgia at work here - both in the creation of the new OBX-8 and in the desire to own one - isn't naive in the least! It's with full awareness. There's nothing wrong with nostalgia, anyway. That Tom and Dave are very much still with us and are seemingly delighted to honor their own legacies is nothing but a good thing, and not only are they speaking to their own histories, but they're acknowledging that instruments they created decades ago still inspire people today.
I just can't see anyone being duped into spending $5000 in a haze of "I wish I was that doctor guy in Prince's band..." One kinda has to be pretty awake to take that amount from a bank account!
I think at some point we have to kind of ask ourselves why things cost what they cost. Before the OBX8 Tom was charging $5000 for a Two Voice Pro....that's two voices, no memory and smaller form factor.....and that was when he was a small operation....now $5000 for 8 voices, Oled screen, bi timbral, patch memory and what will likely be a mass produced product rather than small boutique limited run.....I understand nostalgia and name value have a price tag....but at what point is it just completely not justified?
-
To be honest, the OBX8 is really want I wish the P5/10 reissues were. Taking a classic and pushing it forward. The reissues just seem like a small inch forward compared to the OBX8's features.
Not sure how P5/P10 missed out on what OB-Xa had from start, stereo out with voice panning?
- voice panning is such a major boost in perceived sound
-
To be honest, the OBX8 is really want I wish the P5/10 reissues were. Taking a classic and pushing it forward. The reissues just seem like a small inch forward compared to the OBX8's features.
Not sure how P5/P10 missed out on what OB-Xa had from start, stereo out with voice panning?
- voice panning is such a major boost in perceived sound
Likely cause the Rev 4 is essentially just a reissue but with a few modern commonplace features whereas the OBX8 is a compendium and evolution of the OB catalog with a few nods to the SEM line.
Would I like to see a SEM Four Voice reissue? No. Would I like to see a modern evolution of the Four Voice? Hell yeah.
-
Actually I am genuinely curious why the Prophet 5 is substantially more expensive than the Prophet 6. Size and form factor shouldn’t cause THAT much of an increase
-
Actually I am genuinely curious why the Prophet 5 is substantially more expensive than the Prophet 6. Size and form factor shouldn’t cause THAT much of an increase
In the US the difference is like $100. The additional wood and labor of hand staining it alone justifies that IMHO. Also a P5 can be converted to a 10 voice synth with just an expansion card, with P6 you'd have to polychain a second unit for 12 voices. They each have their strengths...
Aside from the videos that show how alike they can sound (when pushed to do so), if you want to hear how different they can sound, try putting OSC 2 in low freq mode, crank the resonance and sweep the cutoff.. crank the frequency (pitch) up on each until it turns into an audible note and listen to the difference. The Rev4 is capable of these haunting visceral tones that the P6 just doesn't do...just different oscillators and filters.. Knowing how much you're into horror soundtracks I'm surprised the Rev4 isn't your instrument of choice for that reason.
Anyway I have no idea if the components/chips for the Rev4 would cost substantially more, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if so because Dave might have secured long term supply contracts that hold the price down of the parts for P6/OB6, where the Rev4 got released during the chaos of the pandemic which probably increased the price of parts... maybe dramatically based on the inflation we're seeing now.
-
Actually I am genuinely curious why the Prophet 5 is substantially more expensive than the Prophet 6. Size and form factor shouldn’t cause THAT much of an increase
In the US the difference is like $100. The additional wood and labor of hand staining it alone justifies that IMHO. Also a P5 can be converted to a 10 voice synth with just an expansion card, with P6 you'd have to polychain a second unit for 12 voices. They each have their strengths...
Aside from the videos that show how alike they can sound (when pushed to do so), if you want to hear how different they can sound, try putting OSC 2 in low freq mode, crank the resonance and sweep the cutoff.. crank the frequency (pitch) up on each until it turns into an audible note and listen to the difference. The Rev4 is capable of these haunting visceral tones that the P6 just doesn't do...just different oscillators and filters.. Knowing how much you're into horror soundtracks I'm surprised the Rev4 isn't your instrument of choice for that reason.
Anyway I have no idea if the components/chips for the Rev4 would cost substantially more, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if so because Dave might have secured long term supply contracts that hold the price down of the parts for P6/OB6, where the Rev4 got released during the chaos of the pandemic which probably increased the price of parts... maybe dramatically based on the inflation we're seeing now.
Actually I just checked now. The P6 just skyrocket in price so it’s very similar to the P5 in price. Even still, with a stripped down interface, less features etc, one would think it should be less or the same.
-
Actually I am genuinely curious why the Prophet 5 is substantially more expensive than the Prophet 6. Size and form factor shouldn’t cause THAT much of an increase
In the US the difference is like $100. The additional wood and labor of hand staining it alone justifies that IMHO. Also a P5 can be converted to a 10 voice synth with just an expansion card, with P6 you'd have to polychain a second unit for 12 voices. They each have their strengths...
Aside from the videos that show how alike they can sound (when pushed to do so), if you want to hear how different they can sound, try putting OSC 2 in low freq mode, crank the resonance and sweep the cutoff.. crank the frequency (pitch) up on each until it turns into an audible note and listen to the difference. The Rev4 is capable of these haunting visceral tones that the P6 just doesn't do...just different oscillators and filters.. Knowing how much you're into horror soundtracks I'm surprised the Rev4 isn't your instrument of choice for that reason.
Anyway I have no idea if the components/chips for the Rev4 would cost substantially more, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if so because Dave might have secured long term supply contracts that hold the price down of the parts for P6/OB6, where the Rev4 got released during the chaos of the pandemic which probably increased the price of parts... maybe dramatically based on the inflation we're seeing now.
Actually I just checked now. The P6 just skyrocket in price so it’s very similar to the P5 in price. Even still, with a stripped down interface, less features etc, one would think it should be less or the same.
About a year or so ago many synths already on the market, not just Sequential, got a price increase of about 15-30%. The Rev 2 16 voice was $2000 when I bought mine new, now its $2600. Even instruments where the hardware is cheap plastic like the Roland System 8 that have been on the market many years saw a price jump. I think the Rev 4 was already priced with the supply chain issues in mind before it was released, so I think it only went up $100 or so.
-
Yeah true. In either case I’m not totally against the P5 or OBX8 or even owning them but I think it would be too slippery a slope for me personally. I’d start to spend more time chasing the dragon of getting a Model D and ARP 2600 and getting rid of some future classics “just because.” I know I don’t have to do it but I think there would be a tremendous amount of pressure to do so. I’m even feeling pressure to get a P5 now. From my GF gently pointing out my own hypocrisy that I’m shooting movies on black and white film with old cameras while simultaneously saying synthesizers need to move forward to my mom showing me a picture of my late father with his Prophet 5. Ugh I guess Im not against reissues or throwbacks I just don’t think a company like Sequential should devote their focus on that while new ideas and concepts end up getting ignored. That’s my biggest fear. Especially watching a recent video about the Poly Evolver and how unique and forward thinking a design it was.
In regards to your comment about horror soundtracks, it’s not just analog synth scores I’m inspired by. My favorites are mostly the 50 to 70s scores but have a fondness for the 80s and 90s synth stuff. Even still, a lot of composers who used analog gear early on switched to digital synths later on. Brad Fiedel got rid of his Prophet 10 and OBXa combination he used for the first Terminator score and got two Fairlight CMIs for the rest of his scores. Claudio Simonetti switched from a Jupiter 8 to a DX7 and Emulator 2, Carlo Maria Cordio ditched his Polymoog for a D50. Etc etc.
-
I think a lot of people fell for convenience over tone.
Tangerine Dream did that with "Optical Race". They switched to Atari.
I saw them twice. Once a few years before that (Optical Race), and then the Optical Race tour.
The earlier show was 10 times better.
Can you imagine a tour of 3 people, each with Moog System-35/55 playing cool synth shit?
(And, as reference here, please check Ehsan Gelsi's "Big Nights In". The System-55 makes it better.)
-
I think a lot of people fell for convenience over tone.
Yes and no. Some people just wanted a new sound or something different other than traditional subtractive analog synth sounds.
-
I think a lot of people fell for convenience over tone.
Yes and no. Some people just wanted a new sound or something different other than traditional subtractive analog synth sounds.
I can remember in the early 70s being in elementary school, and we had these "music appreciation" hours once a week or so with a specialized music teacher. The synthesizer was "a new thing" at the time, so all of the amazement and wonder that was created around it was the fact that, in capable hands, it could imitate other things. Nobody, and I mean nobody, was talking about the new sounds that analog brought to the musical landscape. It was the novelty of the fact that technology was imitating reality.
So when digital (DX7s and samplers) emerged, there was this "holy crap why would we ever go back to analog?" mentality, because a DX7 could sound like a Rhodes and do bright string sounds that sounded more like the real thing than analog, and then samplers let you record and playback whatever audio source of the real thing you wanted. Most musicians back then were not synthesis experts and just wanted presets so they could focus on what was being done with the patches instead of the design of the patch itself. It was to the point that successful musicians were just paying someone else to do sound design for them when they wanted custom sounds.
There are other factors like tuning and reliability problems with discrete analog instruments, better portability with digital, etc. but the above (i.e. the quest for realistic sounds) was the primary factor in the downfall of the golden age of analog.
-
Yeah true. In either case I’m not totally against the P5 or OBX8 or even owning them but I think it would be too slippery a slope for me personally. I’d start to spend more time chasing the dragon of getting a Model D and ARP 2600 and getting rid of some future classics “just because.” I know I don’t have to do it but I think there would be a tremendous amount of pressure to do so. I’m even feeling pressure to get a P5 now. From my GF gently pointing out my own hypocrisy that I’m shooting movies on black and white film with old cameras while simultaneously saying synthesizers need to move forward to my mom showing me a picture of my late father with his Prophet 5. Ugh I guess Im not against reissues or throwbacks I just don’t think a company like Sequential should devote their focus on that while new ideas and concepts end up getting ignored. That’s my biggest fear. Especially watching a recent video about the Poly Evolver and how unique and forward thinking a design it was.
In regards to your comment about horror soundtracks, it’s not just analog synth scores I’m inspired by. My favorites are mostly the 50 to 70s scores but have a fondness for the 80s and 90s synth stuff. Even still, a lot of composers who used analog gear early on switched to digital synths later on. Brad Fiedel got rid of his Prophet 10 and OBXa combination he used for the first Terminator score and got two Fairlight CMIs for the rest of his scores. Claudio Simonetti switched from a Jupiter 8 to a DX7 and Emulator 2, Carlo Maria Cordio ditched his Polymoog for a D50. Etc etc.
I think you'd love a P5 (moreso a 10 or upgraded P5 as the extra power is lovely and you can always drop it back to 5 voices with a couple of button presses if desired)... but I wouldn't let any external pressures be the reason for getting one. I would get one if you hear something in the tone that seems missing from the overall sound you want to achieve.
There is more YT content available now than when the Rev4 was first released. Back then, a lot of the videos were demo-ing it dry (no FX) which was probably the right thing to do at the time but a lot of people were underwhelmed because they were used to synths with lots of built in FX... But a couple of years later you should be able to get an idea of how it sounds through a good chorus and reverb, etc.
-
I think a lot of people fell for convenience over tone.
Yes and no. Some people just wanted a new sound or something different other than traditional subtractive analog synth sounds.
I can remember in the early 70s being in elementary school, and we had these "music appreciation" hours once a week or so with a specialized music teacher. The synthesizer was "a new thing" at the time, so all of the amazement and wonder that was created around it was the fact that, in capable hands, it could imitate other things. Nobody, and I mean nobody, was talking about the new sounds that analog brought to the musical landscape. It was the novelty of the fact that technology was imitating reality.
So when digital (DX7s and samplers) emerged, there was this "holy crap why would we ever go back to analog?" mentality, because a DX7 could sound like a Rhodes and do bright string sounds that sounded more like the real thing than analog, and then samplers let you record and playback whatever audio source of the real thing you wanted. Most musicians back then were not synthesis experts and just wanted presets so they could focus on what was being done with the patches instead of the design of the patch itself. It was to the point that successful musicians were just paying someone else to do sound design for them when they wanted custom sounds.
There are other factors like tuning and reliability problems with discrete analog instruments, better portability with digital, etc. but the above (i.e. the quest for realistic sounds) was the primary factor in the downfall of the golden age of analog.
Very true. In the soundtrack world early synthesizers were mostly used for sound effects or textures. Oskar Sala scored I believe only one film with his Trautonium synthesizer (Strangler Of Blackmore Castle)...but when Hitchcock hired him all he asked Sala to do with it was replicate the sound of birds for his film The Birds. Even in the 70s it was mostly soundscapes or bleeps and bloop modular sounds. They really didn't become used in a musical context until Vangelis, Carpenter, Tangerine Dream came into the scene.
-
I think a lot of people fell for convenience over tone.
Yes and no. Some people just wanted a new sound or something different other than traditional subtractive analog synth sounds.
I can remember in the early 70s being in elementary school, and we had these "music appreciation" hours once a week or so with a specialized music teacher. The synthesizer was "a new thing" at the time, so all of the amazement and wonder that was created around it was the fact that, in capable hands, it could imitate other things. Nobody, and I mean nobody, was talking about the new sounds that analog brought to the musical landscape. It was the novelty of the fact that technology was imitating reality.
So when digital (DX7s and samplers) emerged, there was this "holy crap why would we ever go back to analog?" mentality, because a DX7 could sound like a Rhodes and do bright string sounds that sounded more like the real thing than analog, and then samplers let you record and playback whatever audio source of the real thing you wanted. Most musicians back then were not synthesis experts and just wanted presets so they could focus on what was being done with the patches instead of the design of the patch itself. It was to the point that successful musicians were just paying someone else to do sound design for them when they wanted custom sounds.
There are other factors like tuning and reliability problems with discrete analog instruments, better portability with digital, etc. but the above (i.e. the quest for realistic sounds) was the primary factor in the downfall of the golden age of analog.
Very true. In the soundtrack world early synthesizers were mostly used for sound effects or textures. Oskar Sala scored I believe only one film with his Trautonium synthesizer (Strangler Of Blackmore Castle)...but when Hitchcock hired him all he asked Sala to do with it was replicate the sound of birds for his film The Birds. Even in the 70s it was mostly soundscapes or bleeps and bloop modular sounds. They really didn't become used in a musical context until Vangelis, Carpenter, Tangerine Dream came into the scene.
A Clockwork Orange, innit! Wendy Carlos back in '71...
-
I think a lot of people fell for convenience over tone.
Yes and no. Some people just wanted a new sound or something different other than traditional subtractive analog synth sounds.
I can remember in the early 70s being in elementary school, and we had these "music appreciation" hours once a week or so with a specialized music teacher. The synthesizer was "a new thing" at the time, so all of the amazement and wonder that was created around it was the fact that, in capable hands, it could imitate other things. Nobody, and I mean nobody, was talking about the new sounds that analog brought to the musical landscape. It was the novelty of the fact that technology was imitating reality.
So when digital (DX7s and samplers) emerged, there was this "holy crap why would we ever go back to analog?" mentality, because a DX7 could sound like a Rhodes and do bright string sounds that sounded more like the real thing than analog, and then samplers let you record and playback whatever audio source of the real thing you wanted. Most musicians back then were not synthesis experts and just wanted presets so they could focus on what was being done with the patches instead of the design of the patch itself. It was to the point that successful musicians were just paying someone else to do sound design for them when they wanted custom sounds.
There are other factors like tuning and reliability problems with discrete analog instruments, better portability with digital, etc. but the above (i.e. the quest for realistic sounds) was the primary factor in the downfall of the golden age of analog.
Very true. In the soundtrack world early synthesizers were mostly used for sound effects or textures. Oskar Sala scored I believe only one film with his Trautonium synthesizer (Strangler Of Blackmore Castle)...but when Hitchcock hired him all he asked Sala to do with it was replicate the sound of birds for his film The Birds. Even in the 70s it was mostly soundscapes or bleeps and bloop modular sounds. They really didn't become used in a musical context until Vangelis, Carpenter, Tangerine Dream came into the scene.
A Clockwork Orange, innit! Wendy Carlos back in '71...
That's very true but it still wasn't a common thing until much later. Jerry Goldsmith's Reincarnation Of Peter Proud was most an orchestra with the ARP 2600 chirping and bleeping with a tape delay during some accented parts. Quincy Jones score for The Anderson Tapes sounded like old computer noises, Les Baxter's score for Frogs was just the sound of frog's croaking run into the ARP 2600 and ring modulated with some sample and hold on resonant filter etc. Later on they were used for melodies as part of a band (but that was likely just because a lot of funk/R&B bands had adopted the Minimoog and ARP Odyssey as part of their instruments and a lot of 70s scores were heavily influenced by jazz/funk of the time)
-
I think you'd love a P5 (moreso a 10 or upgraded P5 as the extra power is lovely and you can always drop it back to 5 voices with a couple of button presses if desired)... but I wouldn't let any external pressures be the reason for getting one. I would get one if you hear something in the tone that seems missing from the overall sound you want to achieve.
Eh if I were to get one I might just get the P5 and not the P10 because I don't really associate the P10 with the single keyboard version and the dual manual version had more capabilities than the single, so even if I wanted to replicate Carpenter or Brad Fiedel's Prophet 10 work, I'd be missing something anyway. Was just listening to Rick Wakeman's score for the 80s slasher The Burning...all done on a dual Prophet 10. He was talking on the Blu Ray about how he wished he still had one because he loved it so much.
In fact the only time I think the single keyboard Prophet 10 was used was on Danny Zeitlin score for the 70s Invasion Of The Body Snatchers remake (Mostly doing weird warbles and gurgles) and Dan Wyman's scores for Without Warning and Hell Night (which played alongside an orchestra, mostly doing drones and pads)
-
I think you'd love a P5 (moreso a 10 or upgraded P5 as the extra power is lovely and you can always drop it back to 5 voices with a couple of button presses if desired)... but I wouldn't let any external pressures be the reason for getting one. I would get one if you hear something in the tone that seems missing from the overall sound you want to achieve.
Eh if I were to get one I might just get the P5 and not the P10 because I don't really associate the P10 with the single keyboard version and the dual manual version had more capabilities than the single, so even if I wanted to replicate Carpenter or Brad Fiedel's Prophet 10 work, I'd be missing something anyway. Was just listening to Rick Wakeman's score for the 80s slasher The Burning...all done on a dual Prophet 10. He was talking on the Blu Ray about how he wished he still had one because he loved it so much.
In fact the only time I think the single keyboard Prophet 10 was used was on Danny Zeitlin score for the 70s Invasion Of The Body Snatchers remake (Mostly doing weird warbles and gurgles) and Dan Wyman's scores for Without Warning and Hell Night (which played alongside an orchestra, mostly doing drones and pads)
You always write such weird takes on synths... you do realise the NEW rev 4 Prophet 10 has very little in common with either iteration of the vintage Prophet 10? In so much as any short-comings of the old single keybed P10 do not apply to the rev 4 P10. And the 'extras' on the Dual manual P10 are just different, not better, and certainly a lot uglier and overblown (I mean that thing looks like an organ with the dual manuals).
I say this because you say you'd get the P5 rev 4 over the P10.. but some of the best features of the Rev 4 are ONLY or BEST useful on the P10... high poly in round robin sounds gorgeous (P5 will have note stealing), but moreso the poly unison mode which sounds better than the old P5 did and is basically useless on the new P5 due to low poly, but on P10 you're back to 5 voice in stacked mode but with some VERY interesting layering choices... not just simply mashing two voices together, it's esp prominent with different portament and velocity/aftertouch settings between layered voices. I don't think of P10 in stacked mode as a mere 2 sounds at once, they are ONE sound... designed with essentially 4 oscs, choice of 2 diff filters and differing 'vintage' settings... you can get some REALLY interesting stuff out of the rev 4 P10 you'd never have gotten out of the old P10 or P5... the velocity to filter expression is just the icing on the cake and blows away vintage prophets for atmosphere and beauty.
I think the rev 4 engine is now so good and so flexible, moreso than the old prophets, to the point that 5 voices seems a waste... all that power and not enough poly to express it, that is why the Prophet 10 is THE best prophet ever (Rev 4).
I'm not sure wtf you should care what someone from 40 years ago associates with more or why when it comes to buying a modern synth, unless you're getting an actual dual manual prophet 10 then the sane and BEST buy is the new Prophet 10. The prophet 5 rev 4 is a ridiculous handicap for such new layering and poly unison power... and ftr nobody gives AF about the P5 badge since rev 4 release... the P10 is now the 'Daddy' and unless you own a battered old vintage P5 neither of the new ones have any kudos beyond their respective NEW powers... and there, the P10 owns everything... inc the OB-X8 with it's too low 8 voices (4 stacked), weaker VCOs, and less direct/convoluted layout with menu diving.
-
I think you'd love a P5 (moreso a 10 or upgraded P5 as the extra power is lovely and you can always drop it back to 5 voices with a couple of button presses if desired)... but I wouldn't let any external pressures be the reason for getting one. I would get one if you hear something in the tone that seems missing from the overall sound you want to achieve.
Eh if I were to get one I might just get the P5 and not the P10 because I don't really associate the P10 with the single keyboard version and the dual manual version had more capabilities than the single, so even if I wanted to replicate Carpenter or Brad Fiedel's Prophet 10 work, I'd be missing something anyway. Was just listening to Rick Wakeman's score for the 80s slasher The Burning...all done on a dual Prophet 10. He was talking on the Blu Ray about how he wished he still had one because he loved it so much.
In fact the only time I think the single keyboard Prophet 10 was used was on Danny Zeitlin score for the 70s Invasion Of The Body Snatchers remake (Mostly doing weird warbles and gurgles) and Dan Wyman's scores for Without Warning and Hell Night (which played alongside an orchestra, mostly doing drones and pads)
You always write such weird takes on synths... you do realise the NEW rev 4 Prophet 10 has very little in common with either iteration of the vintage Prophet 10? In so much as any short-comings of the old single keybed P10 do not apply to the rev 4 P10. And the 'extras' on the Dual manual P10 are just different, not better, and certainly a lot uglier and overblown (I mean that thing looks like an organ with the dual manuals).
I say this because you say you'd get the P5 rev 4 over the P10.. but some of the best features of the Rev 4 are ONLY or BEST useful on the P10... high poly in round robin sounds gorgeous (P5 will have note stealing), but moreso the poly unison mode which sounds better than the old P5 did and is basically useless on the new P5 due to low poly, but on P10 you're back to 5 voice in stacked mode but with some VERY interesting layering choices... not just simply mashing two voices together, it's esp prominent with different portament and velocity/aftertouch settings between layered voices. I don't think of P10 in stacked mode as a mere 2 sounds at once, they are ONE sound... designed with essentially 4 oscs, choice of 2 diff filters and differing 'vintage' settings... you can get some REALLY interesting stuff out of the rev 4 P10 you'd never have gotten out of the old P10 or P5... the velocity to filter expression is just the icing on the cake and blows away vintage prophets for atmosphere and beauty.
I think the rev 4 engine is now so good and so flexible, moreso than the old prophets, to the point that 5 voices seems a waste... all that power and not enough poly to express it, that is why the Prophet 10 is THE best prophet ever (Rev 4).
I'm not sure wtf you should care what someone from 40 years ago associates with more or why when it comes to buying a modern synth, unless you're getting an actual dual manual prophet 10 then the sane and BEST buy is the new Prophet 10. The prophet 5 rev 4 is a ridiculous handicap for such new layering and poly unison power... and ftr nobody gives AF about the P5 badge since rev 4 release... the P10 is now the 'Daddy' and unless you own a battered old vintage P5 neither of the new ones have any kudos beyond their respective NEW powers... and there, the P10 owns everything... inc the OB-X8 with it's too low 8 voices (4 stacked), weaker VCOs, and less direct/convoluted layout with menu diving.
Meh
-
Looking forward to the arrival of my Ob-X8 with great anticipation, and wish Mr. Oberheim & co great success in this venture.
Things I'm wondering about:
1. Can we look forward to other Oberheim classics eventually? Like a Matrix 12 or Expander? Drum machines?
2. When & where can we buy some cool Oberheim branded swag?
3. Will there be a software editor / librarian for the OB-X8?
4. Will there be continued cooperation with the late Dave Smith's company? (RIP, Dave.)
-
If you don't mind unofficial / fan art.
https://www.redbubble.com/shop/?query=Oberheim%20&ref=search_box