The Official Sequential/DSI Forum

Next New DSI Instrument

dslsynth

  • ***
  • 1036
Re: Next New DSI Instrument
« Reply #80 on: April 05, 2016, 01:05:29 PM »
So now you are a real DJ, eh!? . o O ( hehe )

. o O ( run for cover )
#!/bin/sh
cp -f $0 $HOME/.signature

Razmo

  • ***
  • 1930
  • I am shadow...
    • Kaleidoscopic Artworks
Re: Next New DSI Instrument
« Reply #81 on: April 05, 2016, 01:40:33 PM »
hmm... seems like my prayers has been heard... somewhat... a sampler with analog filters.... this MAY be just what I need  :) ... going to look a bit more on the specs...
If you need me, follow the shadows...

Razmo

  • ***
  • 1930
  • I am shadow...
    • Kaleidoscopic Artworks
Re: Next New DSI Instrument
« Reply #82 on: April 05, 2016, 01:46:54 PM »
Looks like this may be exactly what I need to fire off samples on the fly, with analog filters and all... pricing is as always a bit steep, but it's tolerable... Now I only need some SysEx info.... as always  ;D
If you need me, follow the shadows...

Razmo

  • ***
  • 1930
  • I am shadow...
    • Kaleidoscopic Artworks
Re: Next New DSI Instrument
« Reply #83 on: April 05, 2016, 01:56:54 PM »
Hmm... 16 pads... I hardly believe this thing will have 16 filters for that price... there is no info I can find that explains the signal chain on this thing... If my intuition serves me right, those filters is probably global... probably not what I want anyway...
If you need me, follow the shadows...

Re: Next New DSI Instrument
« Reply #84 on: April 05, 2016, 03:09:02 PM »
Yep that's what I think.

If it has 16 (or even 8 ) I would be very interested. I guess as they haven't mentioned it though it's probably just on the mains:(

chysn

  • ***
  • 1095
Re: Next New DSI Instrument
« Reply #85 on: April 05, 2016, 07:48:12 PM »
This is good news. DSI probably devoted like five minutes to this project. "Here are some chips. Here's some documentation. Don't forget to put our logo on it." I bet that precious little actual synth-designing time was wasted in the making of whatever this thing is*.

* Yes, I know what it is. That was me being crotchety.
DSI: DSM03; previously: Mopho Keyboard, Desktop Mopho, Evolver, DSM01
Hardware: Eurorack, Arturia MicroBrute
Software: macOS, Ableton, MuseScore2
Modular Grid: https://www.modulargrid.net/e/racks/view/354385
GitHub: https://github.com/chysn

Re: Next New DSI Instrument
« Reply #86 on: April 05, 2016, 08:18:54 PM »
Hmm... 16 pads... I hardly believe this thing will have 16 filters for that price... there is no info I can find that explains the signal chain on this thing... If my intuition serves me right, those filters is probably global... probably not what I want anyway...

Forget it. These filters will be global. Otherwise this would be a bargain, which I doubt looking at Pioneer's usual price policy.

Razmo

  • ***
  • 1930
  • I am shadow...
    • Kaleidoscopic Artworks
Re: Next New DSI Instrument
« Reply #87 on: April 06, 2016, 01:11:11 AM »
Hmm... 16 pads... I hardly believe this thing will have 16 filters for that price... there is no info I can find that explains the signal chain on this thing... If my intuition serves me right, those filters is probably global... probably not what I want anyway...

Forget it. These filters will be global. Otherwise this would be a bargain, which I doubt looking at Pioneer's usual price policy.

Exactly... and considering it's just a single lowpass, and hipass, with a bit of distortion, on the global outs... then that price is simply outrageous.... I bet the filters is not even MIDI controllable, but probably just hardwired on the global outs... I could make something similar by taking a much cheaper sample player box, and add a DSI modular filter on the main outs, or any other filterbox.

I know this is meant for DJ's now, so I'll let them waste their money on this thing...

DSI: Next invention please!  ;D
If you need me, follow the shadows...

Razmo

  • ***
  • 1930
  • I am shadow...
    • Kaleidoscopic Artworks
Re: Next New DSI Instrument
« Reply #88 on: April 06, 2016, 01:13:27 AM »
I can imagine a lot of disappointed Tempest X-owners, who wanted their own samples, will be getting some long faces when they see this at first, and think it's the holy grail of what they wanted, only to find out it's not...
If you need me, follow the shadows...

dslsynth

  • ***
  • 1036
Re: Next New DSI Instrument
« Reply #89 on: April 06, 2016, 10:49:53 AM »
DSI probably devoted like five minutes to this project. "Here are some chips. Here's some documentation. Don't forget to put our logo on it."

Well I would not be too surprised if they spend a few days and some prototypes on it before sending off the final version of the circuits to Pioneer. After all modifications were made to the P6 filters such a drive and resonance limits. That is probably a bit more than just an edit/compile/produce dance.

But, hehe, good joke! ;)
#!/bin/sh
cp -f $0 $HOME/.signature

Re: Next New DSI Instrument
« Reply #90 on: April 06, 2016, 12:03:33 PM »
Okay, so it's stereo, and there are a couple of other differences:

http://createdigitalmusic.com/2016/04/we-talked-to-dave-smith-about-those-pioneer-sampler-filters/

dslsynth

  • ***
  • 1036
Re: Next New DSI Instrument
« Reply #91 on: April 07, 2016, 05:01:00 AM »
#!/bin/sh
cp -f $0 $HOME/.signature

Re: Next New DSI Instrument
« Reply #92 on: April 07, 2016, 09:16:52 AM »
Okay, so you can actually sample, which is good on top of the true stereo filter.

Shaw

  • ***
  • 799
Re: Next New DSI Instrument
« Reply #93 on: June 29, 2016, 03:04:04 PM »
For me a 12 voice, two timbal P6/OB6 with the modulation abilities of the P12/P2 would be a definate buy.

Something like the VS would be pretty neat as well.


+1
"Classical musicians go to the conservatories, rock´n roll musicians go to the garages." --- Frank Zappa

Razmo

  • ***
  • 1930
  • I am shadow...
    • Kaleidoscopic Artworks
Re: Next New DSI Instrument
« Reply #94 on: July 11, 2016, 12:38:26 AM »
Now that I have turned to multi timbral usage of my gear, I realize, that what I want to see from DSI, is a top notch synth, like the P12, but with a multi mode for 16 channels... a module of sorts, meant for the studio user as a workhorse. 16 voices, so that each channel can have at least 1 voice configured... also the voice allocation should be dynamic across the 16 channels (not like on Evolver, where you reserve a certain number of voices)... on top of that, it should have digital quality FX built in, so that the machines can work as a stand alone device without need for external processing... a delay and reverb as master FX, and a single insert FX for each voice individualy giving you stuff like chorus, phaser, flanger, ensemble, distortion etc... a separate simple LO/HIPASS for each channel as well, for making EQ adjustments on individual channels.

That's what I would really like to see from DSI... what the engine should be, is another story... I just really would like a rack/module that would take the job as a workhorse... very few synths with analog filters and amps do that. If they can make a 12 voice P12, they can do a 16 voice as well, and the FX part is already partly implemented in the new P6/OB6 designs... the voice technology could easily be taken from the P12.

I won't even mind if they called it the "Prophet 16" :D
« Last Edit: July 11, 2016, 12:40:52 AM by Razmo »
If you need me, follow the shadows...

Re: Next New DSI Instrument
« Reply #95 on: July 11, 2016, 11:49:22 AM »
It would be great if they could update the P12 to work like the Modal 002 where you can set it up as a number of synths with different voice counts on different channels.

So you could have a 6 voice poly on channel 1, and then 6 mono synths on channels 2-7 for instance.

I'd pay for that upgrade!

Razmo

  • ***
  • 1930
  • I am shadow...
    • Kaleidoscopic Artworks
Re: Next New DSI Instrument
« Reply #96 on: July 11, 2016, 12:45:22 PM »
It would be great if they could update the P12 to work like the Modal 002 where you can set it up as a number of synths with different voice counts on different channels.

So you could have a 6 voice poly on channel 1, and then 6 mono synths on channels 2-7 for instance.

I'd pay for that upgrade!

I'd rather see it allocate the voices dynamically... it's much more efficient as you will most likely not be playing notes on all channels at the same time... what I like is, when you have 16 channels that you can set up as individual instruments... that makes the multi setup more flexible... even if you only have 16 voices, you could still have 16 different instruments playing at different times... if you allocate voices to a channel, they will not be reused for other instruments when that channel is not used.

Of course a mixed version would be even better... :)

I know that you could use program changes instead, but most synths cut off sounds abruptly when doing this, or gives clicks and pops, so it's not really useful.

But you're right... DSI could update the P12 to work like this I guess... I don't see any hardware restraints in doing that. As it is now, you only have two channels in multi mode, and if one is set to mono mode, then 5 voices are completely wasted... that's why I'd like a dynamic allocation... now I know that it gives some hardware restraints because of the hardwired outputs, but still... if you just decide to use only the main output, it should be perfectly doable.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2016, 12:50:00 PM by Razmo »
If you need me, follow the shadows...

dslsynth

  • ***
  • 1036
Re: Next New DSI Instrument
« Reply #97 on: July 11, 2016, 01:06:38 PM »
It really depends on what you plan to do. If driving a multi-timbral synthesizer from a MPE controller or similar pleasures its way easier to have one voice per channel or two voices per channel in case of stacked sounds and do the voice allocation in software either in the MPE controller or on a computer.

If wanting to use the synthesizer as a flexible studio tool dynamic voice allocation may be a better idea. However, voice allocation in the instrument will be a challenge and could quite likely cause many interesting edge cases including causing the voices you want to ring out be cut short. And so on. Its a complex design/implementation task and who knows if a synthesizer company have the resources to make a solution that is good enough in practical use?
#!/bin/sh
cp -f $0 $HOME/.signature

Razmo

  • ***
  • 1930
  • I am shadow...
    • Kaleidoscopic Artworks
Re: Next New DSI Instrument
« Reply #98 on: July 11, 2016, 06:24:44 PM »
It really depends on what you plan to do. If driving a multi-timbral synthesizer from a MPE controller or similar pleasures its way easier to have one voice per channel or two voices per channel in case of stacked sounds and do the voice allocation in software either in the MPE controller or on a computer.

If wanting to use the synthesizer as a flexible studio tool dynamic voice allocation may be a better idea. However, voice allocation in the instrument will be a challenge and could quite likely cause many interesting edge cases including causing the voices you want to ring out be cut short. And so on. Its a complex design/implementation task and who knows if a synthesizer company have the resources to make a solution that is good enough in practical use?

Well... digital multitimbral synths exist that does this, so the only problem I can see is the retriggering of the voices if analog parts are involved... with a dynamic voice allocation, a given voice would have to be totaly re-initialized when retriggered, since it will require it to take on different sounds... with the hardwired voice way, you can just initialize the voice once, as you would be certain it is the same when retriggering it.

But with a voice structure like the P12, most is digital, only the VCF and VCA are analog... and if you think about it, the Tempest actualy does it... yes it has some retriggering flaws because of it, but it's only in the analog voices, not the digital ones.

Maybe the current hardware architecture of the P12 is not that well suited anyway... I'm thinking about it's voice based architecture... Dave always use a "master CPU" to take the MIDI computing, and controlling each voice's own DSP chip... I don't know if it is fast enough to change on the fly... or if problems will arise because this communication is one-way only... we have seen how DSI portamento works in polyphonic mode because of this.

Still... I don't see why a new synth could not be made to have dynamic allocation... and I would really like to see one... but I guess I could live even with hardwired voice allocation, it would just be more limited.
If you need me, follow the shadows...

dslsynth

  • ***
  • 1036
Re: Next New DSI Instrument
« Reply #99 on: July 12, 2016, 11:59:05 AM »
Yeah Razmo, its certainly doable and after all its "just software". However there are some differences between software synthesizers and analog electronics synthesizers. Most notably that in a software synthesizer one already have plenty of software development resources and are only managing data structures whereas in a digitally controlled analog machine one not only have to manage the physics and timing of the controlled analog circuits but also have to be aware that software is only part of the game in the overall engineering of the instrument.

Implementing multi-timbral functionality is mostly a question of data structures, resource management and smart code so it certainly can be done. But I am also trying to be realistic given past events. I mean how would it feel if show stopping issues with the multi-timbral mode would eventually be considered unimportant? With that said I will of cause repeat my past views that I would just LOVE to see future multi-timbral complex voices from any competent manufacturer, especially DSI. And that hopefully with both one/two voice per channel and dynamic voice assign modes as both have their advantages possibly even when it comes to voice setup timing.

At weak moments in the past I have considered offering to help out with such development but of cause that would be extremely stupid of me to enter the dragon's cave without protective measures of any kind. So I better don't do that! ;)
#!/bin/sh
cp -f $0 $HOME/.signature