Will we see a new Evolver?

[Sacred Synthesis]

An Evolver without digital aliasing just wouldn't be an Evolver.  Jeepers, it would be like having a line green panel.

[gilesjuk]

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

Variable bit rate/sample rate. It's been done elsewhere (Modal 002).

But DSP based synths have been done to death now.

[LoboLives]

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

Variable bit rate/sample rate. It's been done elsewhere (Modal 002).

But DSP based synths have been done to death now.

So have mono synths yet people are still drooling over them.

[gilesjuk]

So have mono synths yet people are still drooling over them.

Only if they say Moog on them. The Behringer clone shows that it's about more than the sound and people want to join a little club and have an ornament on their desk to admire.

[DavidDever]

So have mono synths yet people are still drooling over them.

Only if they say Moog on them. The Behringer clone shows that it's about more than the sound and people want to join a little club and have an ornament on their desk to admire.

There are plenty of inexpensive (under $500 US) monosynths, Moog (new Minitaur, Mother-32, Werkstatt, used MG-1) or otherwise (used DSI Evolver desktop, Pioneer Toraiz AS-1, Arturia Mini- or MicroBrute, Korg Mini- or Monologue, Roland SE-02, used Dreadbox stuff).

Their existence is a gateway drug, of sorts, and their monophonic nature lends itself to simpler, sequenced musical styles which easily expose changes in timbre. Though I'm a polysynth kind of guy, I have to admit that they are rather enticing options....

[LoboLives]

Be nice if the new Evolver could somehow incorporate sampling.

[Soundquest]

I'm glad I am able to record samples at all and import into the Evolver.   But yes, a built in sampler would be easier.      Was just messing around the other day importing a sound/waveform from my wife's new sultry.  (It's a stringed instrument played with a bow- from middle ages era).   I placed the waveform on both osc 3 and 4, with slight detuning and other mods.  I couldn't get it perfect, but I did end up with a good violin.

[LoboLives]

Was just listening to a lot of Poly Evolver demos and honestly...if the next DSI instrument isn't a hybrid I'll likely grab a Poly Evolver on the second hand market.

[Sacred Synthesis]

They're certainly not hard to find.  They generally run $2,000-$2,400.  Make sure you get a PE, rather than the original version.

[LoboLives]

They're certainly not hard to find.  They generally run $2,000-$2,400.  Make sure you get a PE, rather than the original version.

What's the difference?

[DavidDever]

They're certainly not hard to find.  They generally run $2,000-$2,400.  Make sure you get a PE, rather than the original version.

What's the difference?

The PE (Potentiometer Edition) is much more usable IMHO, and its pre-installation implies that you won't need to spend the money to upgrade the panel board.

[LoboLives]

Ugh...I really do hope they come out with a new Evolver. I'd honestly be pretty depressed if they didn't.

[Sacred Synthesis]

They're certainly not hard to find.  They generally run $2,000-$2,400.  Make sure you get a PE, rather than the original version.

What's the difference?

Potentiometers, rather than endless encoders.  The encoders were the pesky type with a will of their own, so that they often skipped around or wouldn't turn to the digit you wanted, making sound design a headache.  You could always do an update if you bought an older PEK.  But in the end, DSI released a PEK with the pots, as with the Prophet '08.

[Sacred Synthesis]

Only DSI would have a sense of it, but I wonder how many people are actually asking for a new Evolver.  There are two or three requests on DSI's Facebook page under you-know-who's video.  I often see others when I poke around the synth sites.  But what is the total number?  Are we only fifteen or twenty?  Are we enough to move Dave Smith, or is it all pointless?

[Paul Dither]

Only DSI would have a sense of it, but I wonder how many people are actually asking for a new Evolver.  There are two or three requests on DSI's Facebook page under you-know-who's video.  I often see others when I poke around the synth sites.  But what is the total number?  Are we only fifteen or twenty?  Are we enough to move Dave Smith, or is it all pointless?

There's still a fair amount of people who like the Evolvers. Currently, there's a thread on Muff Wiggler about the MEK and the desktop version, in which most participants are really enthusiastic about it. The German online music tech magazine amazona.de, for which I occasionally write as well, released an article about all Evolvers in 2016 again, calling the Poly Evolver Keyboard PE Dave's best synth. There's even consensus about it having been underrated at first. And many people also point out the sonic differences between the Prophet 12, the Pro 2, and the Evolvers. So from that I'd say that its unique sound and hybrid architecture are still appreciated today.

However likely that would be or not, though, I would like to see a few improvements on a revisited Evolver. No internal effects for me, as that just takes away space, but rather an analog high-pass filter (even if that would probably lead to getting rid of the pre/post routing option) and an analog distortion, preferably even a drive parameter in the filter section that could rather be used to thicken the sound in a warm manner instead of making it scream. Other than that, streamlined parameter values as well as mod assignment methods, and an OLED screen would be nice. Those would at least be my basic suggestions for an upgraded/revisited version.

[Sacred Synthesis]

Fascinating.  Would you care to pass along a quick summary of the some of the comments or articles you've read?

[Paul Dither]

Fascinating.  Would you care to pass along a quick summary of the some of the comments or articles you've read?

Well, here's the MEK thread from the Muff Wiggler forum: https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=193739

The amazone.de article from 2016 was of course written in German, but I can try to submit an impromptu translation of at least the first page that served as the introduction to a bundled re-release of the original reviews about each model.

[Sacred Synthesis]

I didn't mean to give you homework, Paul.  I just meant off the top of your head.  I'd be interested to hear what other people are saying about the Evolver.

[Sacred Synthesis]

I'm a bit surprised by this, since a new Evolver video is the rarest thing.  I realize YouTube is not the measure of all things, but I would expect such enthusiasm for the instrument to produce many more new Evolver videos.  I seem to be just about the only person still regularly producing them, together with Hitoshi Koizumi and a couple others.

[Paul Dither]

So here's an impromptu translation of said article's introduction (https://www.amazona.de/report-dave-smith-poly-evolver-analogsynthesizer/):

Dave Smith's best synthesizer
08.13.2016

When he introduced the Prophet-5 in 1978, synthesizer veteran Dave Smith provided the cornerstone for analog poly synths. Subsequently, his company Sequential belonged to the "big five" in this branch for roughly 10 years, until the economic pressure caused by flourishing Japanese competitors grew so strong that Sequential eventually had to close its doors for good and the company's name was passed on to Yamaha.

Yet, Dave Smith returned, albeit no one expected this to happen. And roughly two years ago, Yamaha even returned the ownership of his former company's name to him. It almost sounds like a fairytale, since "Dave Smith Instruments" is at the top of the synthesizer industry again these days with products like the Prophet-6 or the OB-6.

People easily forget, though, that the sensational comeback began with a little blue box in 2002: the Evolver. The monophonic half-pint combined the best of both worlds: digital and analog. And it did so in a very consistent manner. For quite a long time, the Evolver was underestimated until Dave Smith came up with a 4-voice polyphonic keyboard that featured the Evolver's technology in 2005—the Poly Evolver was born.

The following report includes Mic Irmer's original review of the Poly Evolver from 2005. The Poly Evolver earned perfect scores, although there were a couple of reservations. The biggest critique was caused by the limited 4-voice polyphony that came at a hefty price tag of more than 2000 Euros. Today, 11 years later, things look a tad different, as the Poly Evolver only costs half of its original price on the second-hand market [note: as of today, that's not correct] and can easily be combined with any other version of the Evolver.

I personally own a 5-voice system based on a small monophonic Mono Evolver Keyboard and a 4-voice Poly Evolver Rack. Thanks to the keyboard's "poly chain out" option, the keyboard behaves like a complete 5-voice system without making it necessary to touch the expander module.

In our "Vintage Hybrid Polyphonic" charts, the Poly Evolver shares the top position along with the Waldorf Wave. The Waldorf Wave is of course traded for much higher prices these days. Yet, one may ask why the sleek blue synthesizer is still sold for way less.

To point it out right away: Its sound and its features are none of the reasons (more about that later), but rather the bad build quality of most models. Back in the day, Dave Smith obviously tried to do anything to achieve a competitive going price for his "big" polyphonic synthesizer. As a result, the quality of the encoders and knobs had to suffer the most. Only with the PE versions—and that was the same case with the Prophet '08—models were eventually released (much too late) whose encoders didn't cause immediate parameter jumps at the slightest touch of a hand. Our 'Doc Analog' did actually optimize a Mono Evolver Keyboard in this regard years ago.

But let's talk about the sound: The sound engine of all Evolvers, of which there are four versions (monophonic desktop, monophonic keyboard with three octaves, polyphonic 4-voice keyboard with five octaves, polyphonic 4-voice rack), is identical. Hence, my statements can be taken at face value with regard to all four models.

The Evolver sound covers exactly the sonic bandwidth you'd expect from a hybrid synthesizer. The Evolver does it a lot better, though, than the Waldorf Q+ for example, which also came along with an analog filter. But a Waldorf Q+ still sounds fully digital, even if you utilize its analog filter. The Poly Evolver behaves quite different.

Each voice of the Poly Evolver consists of four oscillators, two digital ones and two analog ones. Accordingly, pure analog sounds are being made with both analog oscillators. Take the test and you will be amazed by how warm and punchy the Poly Evolver sounds and how it can easily beat his current competitors from the same company (Prophet-6 and OB-6). Like I said, this is my personal opinion, but I'm not alone in this judgement.

The highlight though: With all four oscillators and the manifold options to modulate these (especially with the help of the powerful step sequencer), the Poly Evolver can cover a huge range of sounds that could otherwise only be achieved with really sophisticated plug-ins. And yes, of course it also replaces the Prophet VS with ease, but more about that in the following review.

Enjoy the read and the audio examples,
Peter Grandl, August 2016