Next New Sequential Instrument

[megamarkd]

I'd say for the DSI Sampler

Name: Sequential Mimic
10 Voice Polyphony
10 Part Multitimbrality
10 Track Sequencer
61 keys w/ aftertouch and velocity.
Samples can be uploaded via USB.
Prophet 6 style VCFs and VCAs.
Samples can be set as one shot, gated, and looped.
On board effects as well.

Samples should be able to be reversed as they play with a button.  Forward/backward loop play.  Loop in release/free play release.  Attack/a-b loop/release.  Loop a-b point/loop length modulation.

USB uploading, yes, but also SD card facilities.

As for the name, "Rogue Trooper" after the 2000AD strip by the same name that follows the adventures of a clone soldier.  Or maybe "Big Dave, the hardest man in Manchester".  I know Dave Smith isn't from Manchester, but it too good a name to not use for anything that needs a name.
Or considering my thoughts on the need to rejuvenate synth naming conventions with inspiration from b-grade 50's and 60's horror and sci-fi films, how about The Doppleganger?

[LoboLives]

I'd say for the DSI Sampler

Name: Sequential Mimic
10 Voice Polyphony
10 Part Multitimbrality
10 Track Sequencer
61 keys w/ aftertouch and velocity.
Samples can be uploaded via USB.
Prophet 6 style VCFs and VCAs.
Samples can be set as one shot, gated, and looped.
On board effects as well.

Samples should be able to be reversed as they play with a button.  Forward/backward loop play.  Loop in release/free play release.  Attack/a-b loop/release.  Loop a-b point/loop length modulation.

USB uploading, yes, but also SD card facilities.

As for the name, "Rogue Trooper" after the 2000AD strip by the same name that follows the adventures of a clone soldier.  Or maybe "Big Dave, the hardest man in Manchester".  I know Dave Smith isn't from Manchester, but it too good a name to not use for anything that needs a name.
Or considering my thoughts on the need to rejuvenate synth naming conventions with inspiration from b-grade 50's and 60's horror and sci-fi films, how about The Doppleganger?

Or “The Thing” since it’s an imitation of other synths.

[chysn]

Or considering my thoughts on the need to rejuvenate synth naming conventions with inspiration from b-grade 50's and 60's horror and sci-fi films, how about The Doppleganger?

Yes!!

[Razmo]

I don't really give a **** what it's going to be called, just make me than darn sampler-synthesizer with VCF and VCA!

[LoboLives]

To be honest...I actually don’t have a good feeling for this Namm in regards to DSI...I think with us all asking for a sampler or hybrid or digital VS synth...all we are going to get is a VCO analog mono synth or a four voice lower priced poly to replace the Mophox4.

I just think a lot of people are pumped for this Namm because Korg’s new poly synth, Roger possibly bringing out Linn Drum II, Yamaha possibly making a lower priced version of the Montage but I have a gut feeling it’s all going to be very underwhelming.

[Sacred Synthesis]

It seems to me - putting aside the wished for VS-PEK instrument - that the only synthesizer lacking from the DSI line up is that newly-designed VCO analog mono synth you don't want.  Otherwise, they've basically covered all the bases in their corner.  Personally, it's what I'd most like to see.  Would the Pro 2 make it redundant?  Not if it was really robust on the analog side, had a deep voice architecture, was full-sized, and was made into a module as well.  Then it could surpass the Subsequent 37 and the Matrixbrute.  But I'm not holding my breath.  I no longer try to anticipate what Dave Smith will do next.  This was just idle wishful thinking.

[Razmo]

I think they still lack a sampling synthesizer in their line-up to be honest... it's not enough with a VS like, they do not have anything sample based as a performance synthesizer at all...

[chysn]

It seems to me - putting aside the wished for VS-PEK instrument - that the only synthesizer lacking from the DSI line up is that newly-designed VCO analog mono synth you don't want.  Otherwise, they've basically covered all the bases in their corner.  Personally, it's what I'd most like to see.  Would the Pro 2 make it redundant?  Not if it was really robust on the analog side, had a deep voice architecture, was full-sized, and was made into a module as well.  Then it could surpass the Subsequent 37 and the Matrixbrute.  But I'm not holding my breath.  I no longer try to anticipate what Dave Smith will do next.  This was just idle wishful thinking.

This used to be what I wanted to see more than anything. Today, I'm mostly convinced that the mono synth market is too crowded, and I'm on Team I'd Like to See a Sampler.

[Sacred Synthesis]

It just seems as if Dave does not want a little-bit-of-everything type of company.  The whole DSI line is closely related, and I would expect that it's deliberate.  Even the Prophet 12 and Prophet 6 bear enough resemblance.  Dave's approach/philosophy is the cause, and I would expect to see this continue.  But I will not be surprised if that VS-PEK instrument does actually appear. 

As for a sampling synthesizer, wouldn't that be a drastic turn?

[Sacred Synthesis]

This used to be what I wanted to see more than anything. Today, I'm mostly convinced that the mono synth market is too crowded, and I'm on the "I'd like to see a sampler" bandwagon.

When I go searching for an analog mono synth, the market certainly doesn't seem crowded to me.  It seems, rather, to be littered with frustratingly small instruments, from the Subsequent, to the Odyssey, to the MS-20, to the Analog Solutions instruments, to countless similar modules, and so on.  This is where the redundancy is, and it is indeed redundancy.  Even the Minimoog is on its way out.  That leaves the Matrixbrute, which does not appeal to many of us due to its sound, appearance, and that lousy third oscillator.  The only thing I like about it is the length of its keyboard.

The exception here is the Vermona '14, which is presently on the top of my mono synth list.  An impressive instrument with a superb build quality.  If one of my instruments sells, I'll be quite tempted to buy one.  But of course, only 222 units are being made.

The rare Vermona aside, what's still lacking in the market is a powerful full-sized analog mono synth - preferably VCO based - with a high-quality keyboard and costing about $2,500.  In light of the sound of the Prophet-6 and the capabilities of the Pro 2, DSI could best fill that spot, and I wish they would.

[Razmo]

It just seems as if Dave does not want a little-bit-of-everything type of company.  The whole DSI line is closely related, and I would expect that it's deliberate.  Even the Prophet 12 and Prophet 6 bear enough resemblance.  Dave's approach/philosophy is the cause, and I would expect to see this continue.  But I will not be surprised if that VS-PEK instrument does actually appear. 

As for a sampling synthesizer, wouldn't that be a drastic turn?

Depends on how it is implemented I'd say... if you think of a sampler like with the older E-MU Emulator series, then yes... certainly, but exactly what you are mentioning is what I think it could be... something that is a resemblance of things he already have at hand... Dave is using the same tricks as many other bigger companies now; he reuse his code and ideers in new products, enhancing on them... so yes, that is a typical thing of Dave's "evolving instruments" so to speak...

So what I see possible is a growing on something already there... like the P12 for example, but with the added option of using sample oscillators.... I'm not talking about something with a huge multisample-setup engine and loads of voices... that is why I call it a "sampling synthesizer"... most samplers are better for studio use, but what I could see Dave do, is make the sampling synthesizer more suitable for live performance (which seems to be his goal with all his creations lately).

If he created a really good sample oscillator playback routine, that would allow samples to be stretched all over the keyboard without the need for multisamples, just like in the Roland V-Synth machines, the need for multisample setups could also be completely removed...

I can only talk for myself of course, but what I would want of a sampler, is not to recreate realistic acoustic instruments by using multisamples, but rather the advantage of using sampled textures as oscillators, because it does allow for some REALLY FAST creation of huge pads for Ambient music (and other genres), without the need to sit and tweak on normal oscillators for hours on end.... you could simply just choose a sample texture, and start molding that with filters, other sample oscillators ... maybe even with audio rate modulation in the Mod Matrix... I mean... such a way of using samples would be extremely cool for my usage, and I think others would find it useful too.

Put in the V-Synth COSM effect for sideband filters, and you can turn almost ANY sample into a lush PAD sound...

I really hope for such a synth... and if I have not seen anything before I've saved up enough, I'll probably go for a V-Synth GT instead, simply to get a sample synthesizer.... just really would like to see something like that with VCF and VCA

[LoboLives]

This used to be what I wanted to see more than anything. Today, I'm mostly convinced that the mono synth market is too crowded, and I'm on the "I'd like to see a sampler" bandwagon.

When I go searching for an analog mono synth, the market certainly doesn't seem crowded to me.  It seems, rather, to be littered with frustratingly small instruments, from the Subsequent, to the Odyssey, to the MS-20, to the Analog Solutions instruments, to countless similar modules, and so on.  This is where the redundancy is, and it is indeed redundancy.  Even the Minimoog is on its way out.  That leaves the Matrixbrute, which does not appeal to many of us due to its sound, appearance, and that lousy third oscillator.  The only thing I like about it is the length of its keyboard.

The exception here is the Vermona '14, which is presently on the top of my mono synth list.  An impressive instrument with a superb build quality.  If one of my instruments sells, I'll be quite tempted to buy one.  But of course, only 222 units are being made.

The rare Vermona aside, what's still lacking in the market is a powerful full-sized analog mono synth - preferably VCO based - with a high-quality keyboard and costing about $2,500.  In light of the sound of the Prophet-6 and the capabilities of the Pro 2, DSI could best fill that spot, and I wish they would.

You can always get the Full size Odyssey.

[Sacred Synthesis]

By "small," I didn't mean having smaller keys; I meant a regular-sized three-octave keyboard two-oscillator instrument.

[LoboLives]

I don't usually care about polyphony that much but I just think a basic mono synth really will be a step backwards for DSI. They need to keep evolving not take a major step back and I don't think you are ever going to see a mono synth with more than 3 octaves going forward. So unless you want to settle for the MatrixBrute (Which actually does sound fairly decent to my ears) I would strongly suggest that you may have to get used to an external controller.

I wouldn't mind what I suggested before: the Pro 4.

Basically DSI's interpretation of the Oberheim Four Voice: Four AS-1 Mono synths under one hood. Each has it's own patch memory, own sequence and can be configured in numerous ways (Splits, layers, sequencer only, sequencer transpose, keyboard on/off etc)-however I would personally prefer if Moog did such a synth instead.

[Sacred Synthesis]

'Moving forward' and 'going backwards' are vague expressions, but they imply that the goal is innovation, that a great instrument is a ground-breaking one full of thrilling new ideas. 

My approach is to want, not something sensationally ground-breaking, but simply something excellent, a musical instrument that excels in providing an abundance of already-familiar fundamental features, the basics of synthesis in large quantities.  I don't need something new, new, new.  New compositions provide the new, new, new element.  I'm perfectly content with synthesis as it exists.  I only need more of it in each instrument. 

I'm hoping for a mono synth that fits this description, but I'm realistic enough to expect to have to somewhat create it myself. 

As for instruments that already exist, the Pro 2 comes the closest.  But I'd much rather it have a classic VCO sound, and even be a bit larger in physical size.

[LoboLives]

'Moving forward' and 'going backwards' are vague expressions, but they imply that the goal is innovation, that a great instrument is a ground-breaking one full of thrilling new ideas.  My approach is to want, not something sensationally ground-breaking, but simply something excellent, a musical instrument that excels in providing an abundance of already-familiar fundamental features, the basics of synthesis in large quantities.  It's very hard to find such instruments. 

I'm hoping for a mono synth that fits this description, but I'm realistic enough to expect to have to somewhat create it myself.

Going backwards would be like Moog making the Sub 37 and then making the Model D. So essentially you make a synth that has more features and follow it up with a synth that has none. It would be like Dave following up the REV2 with a mono version...it be counter productive because you can always just stack the REV2 in unison mode anyway. Same with the P6 and OB6. So a whole new synth that is basically just a dedicated "mode" or "feature" on a currently existing one would be pointless.

Moving forwards would be "What's the next step?" I.E. "We got the Sequential name...what else can we do with it?" "We've done bi-timbral...let's figure out a way to add two more engines under that hood without any major menu diving." "The Evolvers are getting popular on the forum...how can we upgrade them? More polyphony? More effects? Possible sampling on one of the digital oscillators?"

You can always go modular. Get a Doepfer A-100 pre assembled system and hook it to one of their 88 key controllers. Actually I tried one myself and I was blown away by the sound. May pick one up eventually.

[Sacred Synthesis]

Right; that's what I figured.  But there is use in having a full-time dedicated mono synth - maybe not for you, but for some of us.  An instrument that is always set aside for melody purposes and appropriately effected is not the same as a Rev2 in mono mode.  It's a matter of having an ensemble of instruments, rather than one instrument that does it all.  And I'd rather not have to buy a poly synth, only to use it as a mono synth.

[Razmo]

'Moving forward' and 'going backwards' are vague expressions, but they imply that the goal is innovation, that a great instrument is a ground-breaking one full of thrilling new ideas.  My approach is to want, not something sensationally ground-breaking, but simply something excellent, a musical instrument that excels in providing an abundance of already-familiar fundamental features, the basics of synthesis in large quantities.  It's very hard to find such instruments. 

I'm hoping for a mono synth that fits this description, but I'm realistic enough to expect to have to somewhat create it myself.

Going backwards would be like Moog making the Sub 37 and then making the Model D. So essentially you make a synth that has more features and follow it up with a synth that has none. It would be like Dave following up the REV2 with a mono version...it be counter productive because you can always just stack the REV2 in unison mode anyway. Same with the P6 and OB6. So a whole new synth that is basically just a dedicated "mode" or "feature" on a currently existing one would be pointless.

Moving forwards would be "What's the next step?" I.E. "We got the Sequential name...what else can we do with it?" "We've done bi-timbral...let's figure out a way to add two more engines under that hood without any major menu diving." "The Evolvers are getting popular on the forum...how can we upgrade them? More polyphony? More effects? Possible sampling on one of the digital oscillators?"

You can always go modular. Get a Doepfer A-100 pre assembled system and hook it to one of their 88 key controllers. Actually I tried one myself and I was blown away by the sound. May pick one up eventually.

Creating a one voice version of the REV2 would be a step back for those who has the doe to get a REV2 yes... but for people who cannot afford that, a 1voice REV2 would definitely be a step forward, since the only comparable device for them would be one of the earlier 1-voice versions of the P08... people has a tendency to always see things from their own point of view... what might be a step back for you, might be a step forward for someone else

[LoboLives]

That is true I am looking at it from my point of view.

[Sacred Synthesis]

Well said, Razmo.

I'm not opposed to any of the instruments proposed - be it a sampling or a hybrid synthesizer.  I'm just making the point that a large mono synth such as I've described is not to be found.