Will we see a new Evolver?

[LoboLives]

Did I not read somewhere here on the forum about someone saying that Dave had said something in the likes of "We're moving back a bit now" or something like that? ... if that is a clue to what he's up to, it COULD very well be an Evolver REV2... especially if many want it now, and people here on the forums have been drooling for one for a long time...

We'll see at NAMM... I doubt it too, but I would not totally loose hope... the REV2 was a bit of a surprise, and if the P08, then why not the Evolver? ... I'd sure be putting a new Evolver REV2 keyboard on my list... that is for sure...

For sure, if he released an updated Evolver especially with on board effects from the P6/OB6 I'd snap it up in a second for the VS waves alone! It go right above my Kurzweil.

Now if he included sampling on one of the digital oscillators...then all hell would break loose.

[blewis]

I know DSI said there’s not going to be an Evolver Rev2.  But can we pretend what it could be?

Evolver Rev2 aka REVolver:  (REV2 capitalized with “olver” overlaid on top of the 2. To spell both REV2 EVolver and REVolver)

- 6 stereo voices
- OLED screen like Prophet-12/Pro-2/Tempest
- Each voice:
  - 2 VCOs (Pro-6/OB-6 style with slop) (subs on each or too much?)
  - 2 Digital oscillators capable of
    - playing single cycle VS waveforms
    - wavetables from Prophet-12/Pro-2
    - FM? lin/exp?
    - Play a mono sample
      - mono lets you have two panned and layered samples
      - but you can combine them in stereo mode if you must (but only single sample layer)
      - samples stored on SD card?
      - samples can be velocity/round robin/random switched with 4 layers
  - Character section. VCO can be routed through or around the character section
    - maybe tweak the decimation algo for vintage sampler vibes?
  - 24db and 12db state variable filters of the Pro-2 per voice (with variable series/parallel routing). 
  - In stereo (cause that’s like what the Evolver is about man)
    - that’s 4 filters per voice. Yikes! (but so awesome?) 24 filters. That’s huge in size if you look at board of the Pro-2!
    - split options for VCO vs digital osc across these two filters on each side.
  - tuned feedback
  - multi-feedback paths of the original Evolver.
  - stereo analog distortion
  - 2 effects setup of the Prophet-6/OB-6/REV2
  - 4 envelopes? VCA, Filt1, Filt2, Aux, (5 for an aux2?)
  - 4 LFOs
  - 1 digital delay (separate from FX) for tuned feedback (get your dBBD in the stereo FX)
  - 6 independent voices like the Polyevolver?
  - Sequencers like the REV2 Prophet 08
  - Stereo input (that can be routed so you can do sequenced stereo effects), but can also be used for sampling.
    - I’ve noticed the Elektron Rhythm has separate sampling inputs - 2 sets of inputs.
- Mod Matrix.  The Prophet REV2 increased the modulation destinations. Seems easier to do with ICs than with discrete?
- Gun metal blue and screen printed finish, but pick a color other than blue for LEDs so people don’t freak. White?
- 5 octave TP9 Fatar keybed
- Lighted mod wheels
- 2 sliders or a mixing joystick (depending on what you want to do with those digital oscillators
- Stereo outs. Stereo Outputs per voice? (dumb?)

What do you think? Can this even be built? is this the Homer Simpson car?

Could it go head to head with the Quantum at the same price?  $3500? $4000? $4500. That’s a crap load of filters.

Is this a dream synth or is this a “do everything, sounds like crap and bankrupts DSI” synth?  This sounds like a “DSI Greatest Hits” synth which probably means it’ll never get built and this is a dumb thread.  Seems like I wind up here mentally once year stuck on the Evolver REV2.

[LoboLives]

I would like the patch buttons that were on the P6 and OB6...but in blue of course

I'd actually like to see a programmable arpeggiator (like on the Prophet 12) instead of a sequencer just to make it different.

A joystick included for sure.

If there is a screen I'd like it over to the right hand side of the synth and small and basic. 

For the effects I'd like to have something unique to the synth as well. You have your distortion, chorus, phaser, reverb and delay but I'd also like to see some more exotic effects like harmonizer and reverse or perhaps a reverse function like on the Tempest where it reverses the envelope.

I'd just like to see it differentiate itself totally from the other DSI synths.

[Razmo]

IF... an Evolver REV2 ever sees the day of light, I really hope that it will be possible to switch the routing so that you can choose between stereo and mono routing... many times when I had the Poly Evolver Rack, I would have loved to switch it into a routing where one analog and one digital oscillator worked as a single voice, panned in the middle... that would have allowed for 8 voices of polyphony on presets with that configuration.

but with that said, I really do not think there is much sense in doing a stereo synth like the Evolver again... mainly because Dave is now making all his synths dual layered... you can easily create a stereo routing by simply panning each layer to each their own side in the stereo field... in fact this way gives you much more flexibility, as you can control every single parameter for each side... with evolver the parameters are the same for each side except for the Filter Split parameter and a few others... and with 16 voices which seems to be "the new thing", you'd have a full 8 voice program.

If you just use the newer synths frontpanel for editing, there are ways to edit both layers at the same time so that it resembles an Evolver in editing as well... all needed is to set the panning separately beforehand.

So I do not miss the Evolvers stereo routing on the P12 at all... what I do miss is the single cycle waveshape slots, and the Sequencers in particular... other than these two things, there really is nothing special about the Evolver... maybe except for the raw sound it produces because of the analog oscillators and gritty dirty digital oscillators.

[dslsynth]

IF... an Evolver REV2 ever sees the day of light, I really hope that it will be possible to switch the routing so that you can choose between stereo and mono routing...

Exactly why I think a far superior solution to fixed stereo panning would be a stereo panning stack mode where both sounds are configured from layer A with a few fixed differences between the two voices.

Its all about value for money and expressiveness for a given set of hardware resources.

[Sacred Synthesis]

The two arrangements produce different results, different overall sounds.  Having stereo oscillators within an otherwise mono sound is quite different in effect to two different layers or units, even if these two are identical.  I've many times compared the effect of the Poly Evolver Keyboard's stereo oscillators with a paired Prophet '08 Keyboard and Module.  The two are definitely not the same, so I would still prefer the PEK's set up.

[Razmo]

The two arrangements produce different results, different overall sounds.  Having stereo oscillators within an otherwise mono sound is quite different in effect to two different layers or units, even if these two are identical.  I've many times compared the effect of the Poly Evolver Keyboard's stereo oscillators with a paired Prophet '08 Keyboard and Module.  The two are definitely not the same, so I would still prefer the PEK's set up.

Seen from a technical point of view, the Desktop Evolver is a two-voice synth... the engine just run them as a "single voice" ... it's two voices with each an analog and digital oscillator..... with the added ability to pan them..... seen from this technical point of view, there should be absolutely no difference to a P12 which has two voices panned left/right using the same parameter setup.

It's a bit hard to conclude it by comparing it to a P08, as this machine is different in a lot of ways, so it WILL sound different... one major difference is that the Evolver has digital oscillators, and several other digital parts in the signal chain which may lead to a different sound...

If we imagine that the Evolver instead of the stereo configuration it has, had been made like the P12, where each voice is only monaural (1analog, 1 digital oscillator), and had each their own set of parameters, and the ability to use two layers with panning, then I'm 100 certain, it would sound exactly like an Evolver with a hardwired stereo configuration.

In theory, what gives this stereo config it's special sound is the fact that the oscillators are free running, and out of phase with each other... the same is true in the Layer A/B approach... I really do not see any other advantage to hooking two synths up together for L/R than that you have double the polyphony (which could definitely be a great advantage)...

If you use only one output from a P08 for the Left channel, and one for the Right, you might get some difference though, if you use the one output that sums to mono... could this be why you hear something different? ... if the two P08's stereo outputs are summed to mono, and the preset in use use both layers with panning for a stereo effect, then I'll admit that it will sound VERY much different... but in that case you are not using only two voices, but rather four.... two summed to mono on the left, and two summed to mono on the right.

[Sacred Synthesis]

Yes, I'm aware that the sound of the Poly Evolver Keyboard differs from that of the Prophet '08.  I wasn't referring to that, but only to the nature of the stereo.  The PEK's simply sounds more effective, that's all.  Explain it however you wish.

Why use two P'08 units?  Because I would rather multiply, rather than divide.  It obviously gives you twice the power and flexibility, rather than half, plus multi-timbrality and stereo.  It's also easier to design a program on the Module that differs from that on the Keyboard, rather than go back and forth between layers on the Keyboard, which is a pain and is prone to error.   

[dslsynth]

It's also easier to design a program on the Module that differs from that on the Keyboard, rather than go back and forth between layers on the Keyboard, which is a pain and is prone to error.

Exactly why a new type of stack mode configuring both voices from layer A would do the job. Each of the two voices would have a few minor differences done automatically.

[Sacred Synthesis]

What I meant was, when making changes to one layer - say, a slightly different cut off frequency or LFO rate - it's easy to forget to save the changes each time you make them.  After all, you might be going back and forth between layers dozens of times before you've finished designing the sound.  I actually find it more convenient to make and save the changes on an entirely different instrument - that is, on a module.  This is especially true regarding volume differences.  For a few patches, I've set one layer to a much lower amplitude than the other.  Again, I prefer to do this on a separate module and then adjust the volume at the mixer.  This also allows for turning up or down that layer's volume while playing. 

The whole keyboard-module configuration is preferable in so many ways to layering on a single unit that I could go on and on about it.  Plus, you get twice as many red lights, which make you pleasantly feel and look like the mad synthesist. 

[dslsynth]

Oh I do get what you are saying. Anyone wanting to design a stereo panning stack mode would have to understand how you are working with stereo panned sounds and use that to design the feature so that it functions well in practice.

[Sacred Synthesis]

I don't think there's a simple generic solution here that suits everyone.  One man's combination is another man's overkill. 

[Razmo]

Well... I guess it also depends on how you actually edit your synth(s)... I use an editor, where I have both layers vissible at the same time... all parameters, so editing the two layers is a piece of cake really... and with the REV2 having 16 voices, it will more or less be the same as two P08's configured for L/R ...

But if you use the front editing, I'd agree, that it will be a pain in the neck compared to having two physical control sets... also, you will still have the option of mixing two layers on each side for added texture depth... this is not possible with a REV2 standalone.

One more difference is the P08's weird way of panning things... it cannot use fixed pan modulation, controlled with the "DC" source for hard panning... that is one of the really nice things about the new REV2... it has the ability to actually switch the Pan modulation between alternating and fixed, and you can use the DC modulation source to hardpan... this is crucial for these "true stereo" configurations of the layers

[LoboLives]

Honestly I think for a bi timbral synth the idea of something like two P6 modules or OB6 modules side by side is the perfect design. Everything is right there without the need for menu diving and setting parameters. It’s just all there. Sadly I don’t think we will see DSI do more of these no menu based synths again.

[Razmo]

Honestly I think for a bi timbral synth the idea of something like two P6 modules or OB6 modules side by side is the perfect design. Everything is right there without the need for menu diving and setting parameters. It’s just all there. Sadly I don’t think we will see DSI do more of these no menu based synths again.

Yeah... but the only thing NOT THERE for a lot of people, are the money needed to buy two P6s ... another aspect of doing it all "in the box" is that you can actually program the presets as you want it... if you do not want a stereo spread, just use a single layer, if you do want a stereo layer, just set the two layers up for it... flexibility wise, I'd take the "all in a box" anytime... but again... it depends on how you use your instruments... if you use them with their interface, it's a pain in the neck since as soon as you flip to another layer, then all the knobs positions do not relate to the current layer anymore... Id go insane if I had to work that way... but when you have an editor, with both layers visible at all times, and all controls present, then I really do not see the problem ... but it of course demands that you use an editor, and have a computer at your side to do it... I'm used to it... so much I have a hard time getting used to even the REV2 interface, even though it's almost a one knob per function design... for live tweaking an already made sound, the interface is ace... but if I want to create a new program from scratch, I simply HAVE TO HAVE an editor at hand.

[LoboLives]

Honestly I think for a bi timbral synth the idea of something like two P6 modules or OB6 modules side by side is the perfect design. Everything is right there without the need for menu diving and setting parameters. It’s just all there. Sadly I don’t think we will see DSI do more of these no menu based synths again.

Yeah... but the only thing NOT THERE for a lot of people, are the money needed to buy two P6s ... another aspect of doing it all "in the box" is that you can actually program the presets as you want it... if you do not want a stereo spread, just use a single layer, if you do want a stereo layer, just set the two layers up for it... flexibility wise, I'd take the "all in a box" anytime... but again... it depends on how you use your instruments... if you use them with their interface, it's a pain in the neck since as soon as you flip to another layer, then all the knobs positions do not relate to the current layer anymore... Id go insane if I had to work that way... but when you have an editor, with both layers visible at all times, and all controls present, then I really do not see the problem ... but it of course demands that you use an editor, and have a computer at your side to do it... I'm used to it... so much I have a hard time getting used to even the REV2 interface, even though it's almost a one knob per function design... for live tweaking an already made sound, the interface is ace... but if I want to create a new program from scratch, I simply HAVE TO HAVE an editor at hand.

Oh I just mean the idea of having to engines on the front at the same time and separate from each other. Not just a P6 or OB6 module specifically. Just the concept of it with a few tweaks.

[Sacred Synthesis]

Honestly I think for a bi timbral synth the idea of something like two P6 modules or OB6 modules side by side is the perfect design. Everything is right there without the need for menu diving and setting parameters. It’s just all there. Sadly I don’t think we will see DSI do more of these no menu based synths again.

Yeah... but the only thing NOT THERE for a lot of people, are the money needed to buy two P6s.

It all depends on your priorities.  In my case, the set up is all about keyboard instruments.  I have virtually nothing else except the synthesizers and a couple of effects.  So, I'm able to buy keyboard-module pairs because I don't spend thousands of dollars on drum machines, sequencers, computers, editors, software, and whatever other gadgets are popular today.  In the end, my set up is quite modest and sparse, compared to the many I see online, and I seldom spend a dime on it, other than on the initial instruments.  It's basically three keyboards, one pedalboard, and three modules - that's it.  Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity.

[Sacred Synthesis]

Honestly I think for a bi timbral synth the idea of something like two P6 modules or OB6 modules side by side is the perfect design. Everything is right there without the need for menu diving and setting parameters. It’s just all there. Sadly I don’t think we will see DSI do more of these no menu based synths again.

I totally agree.  It's easy, convenient, and sharp looking, with no need for a computer or an editor.

[gilesjuk]

For a follow up to the PEK it would make sense to drop the DSP oscillators and use FPGA like the Peak uses. These produce alias free oscillators with massively fast modulation capabilities.

I don't think DSI would ever make an extremely high end synthesizer again, nothing beyond what the P12 and PEK cost. There's a sales curve and the higher the price the lower the sales. To accommodate the lower sales you have to make the cost even higher than it could be.

Lets not forget that Sequential went out of business and many lessons have been learned from those days

[LoboLives]

For a follow up to the PEK it would make sense to drop the DSP oscillators and use FPGA like the Peak uses. These produce alias free oscillators with massively fast modulation capabilities.

I don't think DSI would ever make an extremely high end synthesizer again, nothing beyond what the P12 and PEK cost. There's a sales curve and the higher the price the lower the sales. To accommodate the lower sales you have to make the cost even higher than it could be.

Lets not forget that Sequential went out of business and many lessons have been learned from those days

As long as there’s is a way to dial in how much aliasing you want...much like the stop dial.