Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
91
Mopho X4 / Mod wheel modulation sounding when when wheel is off
« Last post by henryburnett on November 24, 2023, 08:56:17 AM »
Hi, just getting acquainted with my new Mopho X4 and I've come across something puzzling.

I'm trying to assign the mod wheel to control vibrato via LFO 1.

I set LFO1 to modulate Osc1&2 pitch and set the amount to 0.

Then I head to 'modulators', choose ModWhl and dial in the amount, say 30.

The mod wheel now adds the pitch modulation - HOWEVER - a small amount of pitch mod is still present when the wheel is fully down. The larger the amount I set for the wheel to control the LFO amount, the more pronounced it is even when the wheel is off. It's like the wheel isn't properly hitting zero.

I've calibrated the wheels but no change.

Any thoughts?

Thanks,
Henry 
92
Prophet-5/Prophet-10 / Re: Why did you choose the Prophet 10?
« Last post by LPF83 on November 24, 2023, 08:24:08 AM »
OB-X8 might have more possibilities, but P10 is bi-timbal which opens many possibilities impossible with the OB-X8.

Sorry, but that's incorrect... the OB-X8 is bi-timbral, and IMO easier to configure for that particular purpose in the various modes for stacks/splits due to the screen and dedicated buttons.
93
Prophet-5/Prophet-10 / Re: Why did you choose the Prophet 10?
« Last post by Pl@ton on November 24, 2023, 07:03:10 AM »
OB-X8 might have more possibilities, but P10 is bi-timbal which opens many possibilities impossible with the OB-X8.
94
Prophet-5/Prophet-10 / Re: Why did you choose the Prophet 10?
« Last post by JCinvisible on November 24, 2023, 12:24:31 AM »
Thanks for giving me the insight.I think I am with catchthehare here. I believe the P10 has chosen me. Order placed. Can't wait!
95
Prophet-5/Prophet-10 / Re: Why did you choose the Prophet 10?
« Last post by g3o2 on November 24, 2023, 12:23:24 AM »
Programming patches is more straightforward on P10 thanks to its knob per function interface. Performance wise, the OB-X8 is the easiest to use.

My subjective notes.

In mono mode, they both sound pretty fat and comparable. The X8ís stereo would initially have you think otherwise - itís like an effect.
X8 sounds obviously brighter (filters) and appears to be capable of a wider sonic temperature range (warm to cold), where the P10 is more often on the warmer side. Still, texture wise P10 is probably the most versatile (eg polymod, filter self-oscillation, wave form variety).

To illustrate this with a few sounds. Youíd use the X8 to produce a wide cathedral organ, while P10 would be your inspiring little pipe organ. An electric piano sounds pretty convincing (and tight) on the X8 but imo not as drifting-away/natural as on the P10. The same goes for warm pads (very warm on P10) but the X8, still warm, is able to produce a wider range of pads and strings sounds.
96
Pro 3 / Re: Erasing/adding modulation destination lane
« Last post by Milton on November 23, 2023, 07:48:16 PM »
*Update: You have to hold down TRACK SEL to add new. This is actually really nice, cause you can test different destinations with and existing modulation lane running. Nice!

97
Iím not sure you can, I think the transpose is effectively Ďglobalí - maybe someone can correct me if wrong.

The simple workaround here though is to tune one layer one octave above or below its current settings - you can do this for the oscillators and for the samples if using both, and that should give you the desired results

It is not so simple because many programs and many of its parameters are pitch dependent...For example if the preset has filter key tracking ,sync,fm etc i ll have problem


Letís break it down..

If you have patches where one layer has ďpitch dependentĒ settings but the other layer does not, then make the oscillator pitch  / sample pitch adjustments on the layer which does not.

For the ones where you have these types of configurations on both layers letís break it down further:

Key tracking: after adjusting the pitches then all you have to do is adjust the cutoff value as necessary to get it sounding the same (no need to change the key tracking value).

Sync: I donít believe any adjustment would be required here? Seeing as the oscillators would still maintain their relative differences.

FM: I havenít explored FM on the PX so canít say for sure.

Etc.: Is there anything else which is ďpitch dependent ď?










yes,i ve alread thought those ''solutions'' but the truth is that they are not the right solutions.All of them require more time,work and additional setting for something that it could be fixed with just a press of a button.

Maybe there is a way by pressing one button, but I donít think thatís the case.

I donít see how these are not the Ďrightí solutions. Synths work how they work, and thatís it!

An besides, it really is not that difficult to for example fix the one in regards the key tracking. Change the oscillator pitches - about a 30 second job - and then adjust the filter cutoff. It really shouldnít take long!

Like I said I donít think itís a problem for synching as that relies on the relative pitches so there shouldnít be any impact there.

And is there really anything else apart from key tracking and perhaps the FM?

EDIT - Is anyone else aware if there is a simple way to do this using transpose? I did try it out but as suspected pretty sure itís global, plus from memory it says as much in the manual
98
Iím not sure you can, I think the transpose is effectively Ďglobalí - maybe someone can correct me if wrong.

The simple workaround here though is to tune one layer one octave above or below its current settings - you can do this for the oscillators and for the samples if using both, and that should give you the desired results

It is not so simple because many programs and many of its parameters are pitch dependent...For example if the preset has filter key tracking ,sync,fm etc i ll have problem


Letís break it down..

If you have patches where one layer has ďpitch dependentĒ settings but the other layer does not, then make the oscillator pitch  / sample pitch adjustments on the layer which does not.

For the ones where you have these types of configurations on both layers letís break it down further:

Key tracking: after adjusting the pitches then all you have to do is adjust the cutoff value as necessary to get it sounding the same (no need to change the key tracking value).

Sync: I donít believe any adjustment would be required here? Seeing as the oscillators would still maintain their relative differences.

FM: I havenít explored FM on the PX so canít say for sure.

Etc.: Is there anything else which is ďpitch dependent ď?










yes,i ve alread thought those ''solutions'' but the truth is that they are not the right solutions.All of them require more time,work and additional setting for something that it could be fixed with just a press of a button.
99
Prophet-5/Prophet-10 / Re: Why did you choose the Prophet 10?
« Last post by Analog Prophet on November 23, 2023, 05:55:01 AM »
Have them booth:

When the P5 rev 4 first was released I bought it. When Firmware 2.0 was released I bought the optional voice card and upgraded to a P10 because of the new layer and split functions.

When the OB-X8 was released I bought it as well. Was a little bit worried it should sound to close to the P5 as well as to my Oberheim Xpander. But they all have different tonal qualities.

The P5/10 is more edgy, punchy and has a very nice mid. The OB-X8 is more mellow, fat and more possibilities.

If I had to keep just one of these two it would be very hard to chose as they booth are winners. For the sound it would be the OB-X8, for the classic vibe, the joy tweak and to play it would be the P10.

Here a short comparison I did with 4 similar patches I did for the P5 (10) and the OB-X8:

https://youtu.be/gxBtPEgJQRo?si=90zpgiPD0ZrCS5wS
100
Prophet-5/Prophet-10 / Re: Why did you choose the Prophet 10?
« Last post by Catchthehare on November 23, 2023, 02:29:19 AM »
The Prophet 10 chose me, I didn't have much say in the matter to be fair.  8)
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]