Prophet 6 OS request

LoboLives

Prophet 6 OS request
« on: March 09, 2017, 03:12:05 AM »
I know that the Prophet 6 just had a new OS update not too long ago but frankly I thought it was missing some key elements.

1.) Transposing the sequence on the fly instead of holding down the RECORD button to do so. Simply run the sequence and hit the Hold Button to latch the sequence and allows you to transpose the sequence with one hand effectively allowing you to play on another synth with the other.

2.) Master Tune. I'm not sure if this is a function that's already implemented but I'd love to see a Master Tune knob (much like on the Moog Sub 37). Since there's not one already available, I'm wondering if this can be done but clicking the GLOBAL button and having the frequency knobs not be locked to semi tones but simply tuned freely.

3.) More Effects. This is more of a nice to have but while the new effects (Ring Mod, Flanger) are nice it would be interesting to see some more experimental effects like Harmonizers and Reverse delays (I was listening to The Boogeyman score by Tim Krog and while I'm assuming it was done in post it's really wild to hear synth being played in reverse..especially when combined with delays.). Also I know the REV 2 has a recreation of the Maestro Phaser but it would be nice if this could be included in the Prophet 6 as well.




Re: Prophet 6 OS request
« Reply #1 on: March 09, 2017, 02:13:35 PM »
It's unlikely the sequence transpose operation will change, as it's the same in two instruments. Same with master tune. The Maestro Phaser model is already in the Prophet-6. It was developed for the OB-6 and it was one of the effects we ported over. Not sure if new effects will get added, it's all dependent on code space and available CPU cycles.
SEQUENTIAL | OBERHEIM

LoboLives

Re: Prophet 6 OS request
« Reply #2 on: March 09, 2017, 05:01:21 PM »
It's unlikely the sequence transpose operation will change, as it's the same in two instruments. Same with master tune. The Maestro Phaser model is already in the Prophet-6. It was developed for the OB-6 and it was one of the effects we ported over. Not sure if new effects will get added, it's all dependent on code space and available CPU cycles.

I just think it's such a major misstep. While it's neat being able to play over top of the sequencer, it's foolish that it requires me to hold down a button to transpose it on the fly while the Moog Sub 37, Oberheim Two Voice Pro, Aurtiria Matrixbrute all are able to do it with one hand. It renders the sequencer cumbersome otherwise.

Re: Prophet 6 OS request
« Reply #3 on: March 09, 2017, 05:02:52 PM »
Your opinion is valid and fair enough, I was simply telling you what is likely to happen. Enjoy that Maestro Phaser!
SEQUENTIAL | OBERHEIM

Re: Prophet 6 OS request
« Reply #4 on: March 10, 2017, 10:42:08 AM »
Can anyone tell me if I download the latest OS update will it automatically install the previous OS updates that preceded it or will I need to install each OS update individually?

Thanks

GBP

Re: Prophet 6 OS request
« Reply #5 on: March 10, 2017, 11:07:01 AM »
Simple answer: Yes, everything else is included.
Like in 99,8% of all other Firmware-Update all over the world for every piece of electronic stuff.

Re: Prophet 6 OS request
« Reply #6 on: September 22, 2017, 04:25:58 PM »
It's unlikely the sequence transpose operation will change, as it's the same in two instruments. Same with master tune. The Maestro Phaser model is already in the Prophet-6. It was developed for the OB-6 and it was one of the effects we ported over. Not sure if new effects will get added, it's all dependent on code space and available CPU cycles.

Could this be implemented as a Seq Pedal Mode option? It seems like this could be implemented across all DSI synths with 64-step sequencers. I would love to see this feature, as well.

wetfood

Re: Prophet 6 OS request
« Reply #7 on: September 23, 2017, 02:39:35 AM »
The message regarding the glaring problems that remain with the Prophet 6 seem to be consistently met with the clear answer that there is no intention to addressing them. Robot Heart, you come across as a Sean Spicer kind of apologist and shoot down genuine questions and concerns, and it's exactly this type of response that makes me question why I paid so much for a synth that doesn't live up to its claims.

The sequencer as it is is fairly useless in any real world situation. I've "solved" that problem by using an external sequencer, which wasn't the solution I wanted.

But why choose to willfully ignore the input of the people paying your salary (the people buying these synths!)? This is what I don't understand.

The message that reads loud and clear is that DSI is more invested in hyping the new product than delivering on the ones that already exist. I was considering the REV2, but if development will just cease once the next thing comes out in a year or two.. then what's the point? Have you guys switched to the Apple model, where every couple years the old thing becomes obsolete?

There are still bugs and glitches with my P6 and frustrations that many users have, that have been voiced again and again only to be met with flippant responses. I don't think it is asking too much for a sequencer that can be transposed in a way that is actually PLAYABLE by real musicians. I use external gear and it works great. but now I have a beautiful synth with a built in sequencer and arpeggiator that are inferior to many less expensive tools out there (arturia keystep, iOS apps, etc). I have to use external gear to get it to do what it seems it should do on its own.
« Last Edit: September 23, 2017, 03:12:39 AM by wetfood »

LoboLives

Re: Prophet 6 OS request
« Reply #8 on: September 25, 2017, 05:27:35 AM »
The message regarding the glaring problems that remain with the Prophet 6 seem to be consistently met with the clear answer that there is no intention to addressing them. Robot Heart, you come across as a Sean Spicer kind of apologist and shoot down genuine questions and concerns, and it's exactly this type of response that makes me question why I paid so much for a synth that doesn't live up to its claims.

The sequencer as it is is fairly useless in any real world situation. I've "solved" that problem by using an external sequencer, which wasn't the solution I wanted.

But why choose to willfully ignore the input of the people paying your salary (the people buying these synths!)? This is what I don't understand.

The message that reads loud and clear is that DSI is more invested in hyping the new product than delivering on the ones that already exist. I was considering the REV2, but if development will just cease once the next thing comes out in a year or two.. then what's the point? Have you guys switched to the Apple model, where every couple years the old thing becomes obsolete?

There are still bugs and glitches with my P6 and frustrations that many users have, that have been voiced again and again only to be met with flippant responses. I don't think it is asking too much for a sequencer that can be transposed in a way that is actually PLAYABLE by real musicians. I use external gear and it works great. but now I have a beautiful synth with a built in sequencer and arpeggiator that are inferior to many less expensive tools out there (arturia keystep, iOS apps, etc). I have to use external gear to get it to do what it seems it should do on its own.

1.) Actually a lot of us have patience. DSI is a small operation and they have a ton of things going. I don't mind waiting for a P6 update. It's a nice to have but it's not do or die. The sequencer is a poly sequencer so I've changed by approach to it. I use other synths/sequencers for bass lines or staccato parts, I use the P6 sequencer for chord sequences and pads. Sometimes instead of waiting for things just use what you have and explore that.

2.) It's great that you found a solution by using an external sequencer.

3.) Keep politics off this forum please and thanks.

Re: Prophet 6 OS request
« Reply #9 on: September 25, 2017, 01:52:57 PM »
Sorry wetfood, don't EVER compare me to anyone in politics, especially someone in the current US administration, or make any discussion political. This is your one and only warning, you will be banned.

Lobolives seems to understand how we operate, look to his answer for some insight.
SEQUENTIAL | OBERHEIM

wetfood

Re: Prophet 6 OS request
« Reply #10 on: September 26, 2017, 02:21:42 AM »
ok  :o

MMYYKK

  • *
  • 25
  • Science
    • MMYYKK
Re: Prophet 6 OS request
« Reply #11 on: October 09, 2017, 10:58:33 PM »
It's unlikely the sequence transpose operation will change, as it's the same in two instruments. Same with master tune.

I just want to clarify what you meant here. Are you saying that it can not be done? or are you saying that DSI probably won't do it because you'd have to do it for multiple instruments?


MMYYKK

  • *
  • 25
  • Science
    • MMYYKK
Re: Prophet 6 OS request
« Reply #12 on: October 10, 2017, 08:04:39 AM »
I'd like to make a request for the ability to filter out transmission of note data via Pram xmit global. It would be nice to be able to filter out sending of note data in order to use the P6 as a clock source for other synth's without sending note data. Moog sub37 is able to do this and it's a very helpful feature.

MMYYKK

  • *
  • 25
  • Science
    • MMYYKK
Re: Prophet 6 OS request
« Reply #13 on: October 10, 2017, 08:24:54 AM »

1.) Actually a lot of us have patience. DSI is a small operation and they have a ton of things going. I don't mind waiting for a P6 update. It's a nice to have but it's not do or die. The sequencer is a poly sequencer so I've changed by approach to it. I use other synths/sequencers for bass lines or staccato parts, I use the P6 sequencer for chord sequences and pads. Sometimes instead of waiting for things just use what you have and explore that.


based off Robot Heart's response you may be waiting for something that will never come.

I understand DSI can't guarantee anything, but that response seemed very dismissive. I could not tell from that response whether it will be brought up or mentioned to anyone for consideration. I mean, the nature of making music is troubleshooting so I understand that if something doesn't work the way you want you have to find ways to make it work. however, if there is a chance that there could be a future update that can fix the problem and someone in the community of users makes a request, it seems like that request should be met with a bit more consideration than "it's not likely to happen". we all spent close to $3000 for this sythesizer, and with that comes $3000 expectations. It may not be do or die for you, but we don't all have the luxury of having multiple devices to solve our problems. some of us saved up for months or years to buy this one synth. 

I don't agree with wetfoot's delivery, but I understand his frustration. 
« Last Edit: October 10, 2017, 08:28:06 AM by MMYYKK »

Re: Prophet 6 OS request
« Reply #14 on: October 10, 2017, 12:45:27 PM »
I'm saying it's unlikely to change because it's been implemented the same way on multiple instruments. So, Dave is unlikely to change one instrument's operation, making it different from the others, and even less likely to make that change across multiple instruments because a handful of people would like it to work differently.

Sorry if my response sounded dismissive. The nature of forums is that things get repeated again and again and again. We've answered that question multiple times, and the answer remains the same so it'd be better for people to refer to the previous answer rather than asking again.

Features get added based on a number of things. In no particular order but not limited to, ease of implementation, available code space, popularity of feature, time available for OS updates. As a synth fanatic and fellow consumer, I empathize with your frustration and I completely understand how hard it is to be told "no, it won't happen" when it's seemingly such a simple thing. I repeatedly go through that process during the design phase of every synth we make, and without fail every time we update any OS. I am the customer's voice, and I push hard for features that are popular as well as features that I would like to see.

However, at the end of the day it's not up to me and there are many complex variables that go into the decision-making process behind the scenes. We're a small company with limited resources and that means not everything that people want will get done. We're not in a position to "just hire more programmers", "open-source the code", or any of the other common recommendations that follow that statement. You'll just have to trust that we are operating as efficiently as we can given the size of the market.

I will reiterate a point that has been made multiple times by DSI and other musicians; please do not purchase an instrument based on the features *might* be added in the future. That not is an expectation you should have, you should buy it for what is right then. It is reasonable to think that if something is broken and stifles workflow that it should be fixed, and we're good about that. But, as usual everyone's personal feature request is always "the most important one" so it's important to remember there's a lot of competition for that request. If you don't like how something is, do your homework and see if it's like that on any other instruments we make, because if so it's not likely to be changed in your instrument.

I know a synth is a big purchase. None of this is being said to minimize the money you've spent. Regardless of cost, feature additions in hardware synths should be looked upon as bonuses, not as expected because you bought a product. We don't run a subscription service and we're not selling software instruments. I know people have come to expect many rapid iterations of software releases as the norm, but that's not our business model.

Any OS changes take a lot of resources even for seemingly simple things. The older a synth or the more mature the OS is, the less likely it is to be updated with new features. The Prophet-6 has a fairly mature OS at this point, so knowing how the company operates it's easy for me to give an answer with a reasonable degree of certainty. I'm not expecting everyone to like the answer, but I'd rather have you guys know the real answer instead of promising something that may never come.

Also, the forum should never be treated as somewhere to make definitive feature requests or bug reports. We provide the forum first and foremost as a place for musicians using our gear to collaborate and discuss. It's also a place to interact with DSI, though on a more limited and irregular basis. The only decisive way to ensure your request or bug has been heard is to contact us directly. We'll give you feedback, let you know that you've been heard, and add your bug or request to the list.
SEQUENTIAL | OBERHEIM

MMYYKK

  • *
  • 25
  • Science
    • MMYYKK
Re: Prophet 6 OS request
« Reply #15 on: October 10, 2017, 08:50:30 PM »
Thank you for that detailed explanation Robot Heart. I appreciate the time and consideration and I now completely understand where you are coming from. as you can see I'm still pretty new to the boards so I didn't consider how many times questions of this nature are asked. It is also helpful to know the proper channel for reporting bugs and requesting features. I appreciate the work you all put into these instruments and at the end of the day the P6 is amazing as is. cheers man.   

dsetto

  • ***
  • 388
Re: Prophet 6 OS request
« Reply #16 on: October 17, 2017, 01:27:46 AM »
A useful sticky in several forums, perhaps?

Re: Prophet 6 OS request
« Reply #17 on: October 17, 2017, 04:40:29 PM »
Looking at the midi implementation.....couldn't the hold of the sequence record button for transpose be done through midi messages(to possibly be done with a latching midi footswitch of some sort?)  Could this be a possible work around?
« Last Edit: October 17, 2017, 04:56:36 PM by John01W »

Re: Prophet 6 OS request
« Reply #18 on: October 18, 2017, 08:29:16 AM »
I still cant believe the sequencer doesn't output note data via midi out!