Placing the Prophet 12/OLED Display

[Sacred Synthesis]

I've had my Prophet 12 loaner for about three weeks now, and in that period of time I've spent about fifteen hours with the instrument.  My opinion of it has evolved from what it previously had been, but it has evolved over the last few weeks as well.  I've changed my mind several times about it, and I'm still not sure where to place the instrument, where to categorize or how to regard it.

My intention for some time has been to find that most cryptic of musical things, a Poly Evolver Keyboard Mk. II.  One thing I can say with certainty - this is not it.  The Prophet 12 is by no means a PEK Mk. II.  I could see how, ostensibly, one could argue that it is.  If you simply compare control panels, you'll see many similarities.  But you could also say that about practically any two full-featured polyphonic synthesizers.  However, the Poly Evolver Keyboard is utterly unique.  I've come to appreciate this fact many times before, and borrowing this Prophet 12 has been only the latest reminder. 

The heart of the Poly Evolver Keyboard, and the thing that makes it so unique, is its specific assortment of digital oscillators.  These are an admittedly rough batch of wave shapes coated with aliasing, which places serious limitations on their musical usefulness.  Nevertheless, out of the approximately ninety tones, there is a substantial number that allows for much musicality, not to mention some unique sparkling touches to a chord or melody.  With a generous amount of reverb, this digital aliasing results in unexpected magical moments, and I wouldn't want to miss one of them.

By comparison, the Prophet 12 has a very limited number of clean and tidy wave shapes.  Plus, Noise is found in the oscillators, so, if you want to add a touch of hiss to a patch, you'll then be limited to only three oscillators.  These wave shapes cover a fairly limited timbral range, although there are ways to alter them.  Two are obviously meant to form the basis of choir/vocal patches.  But if you visually compare the shape of the "Ahhh" wave shape to its equivalent in the Evolver (#44), you'll find that the two substantially differ in appearance and, therefore, sound.  (The actual wave shape is visible on the P12 screen, and you can compare this with the wave shape image found in Anu Kerk's Guide.) Hence, my best choir patch on the P12 is far inferior to the same patch I've made on the PEK.

My point is, there is a world of difference between a Prophet 12 and a Poly Evolver Keyboard (and of course, I mean an eight-voice PEK).  I don't agree with the view that the P12 is a PEK Mk. II.  The two are entirely different instruments, and from my limited experience, I've concluded that it would make no sense to replace the older instrument with the newer, which was my hope.  But my intention is not at all to criticize the P12.  I have been so impressed with this superb synthesizer.  It's just that its placement in the larger picture has been a quandary, how to categorize it.  But for certain, it isn't an Evolver killer.

The Prophet 12 is its own instrument.  If I were to put a Poly Evolver Keyboard, a Prophet '08, and a Prophet 12 side-by-side, I'd have to say that the P'08 and the P12 are the two more similar instruments.  Yes, the P12 is incomprehensibly more sophisticated than the P'08, and that's the beauty of it.  The popular description of it as being virtually a hard-wired modular synthesizer is accurate and not an over-statement.  But regarding sound and strengths, I'd say these two are sonic relatives.  Where the P'08 sounds good, so, too, does the P12.  All the classic patches - strings, brass, organ, sawtooth solos, PWM pads, etc. - can be produced almost equally well on both.  I would still prefer the P'08 for these patches, because I think it has the analog edge by just a touch, but I would also be quite content to have only Prophet 12's to play.  Whatever I do, I could do it quite satisfactorily with this one synthesizer.

My Poly Evolvers have taken a huge sigh of relief; they're no longer threatened by the Prophet 12.  In fact, a Prophet 12 would compliment a PEK quite nicely; whereas, it might be a bit redundant alongside a Prophet '08 or a Prophet REV2.  That's my present assessment of things.  I would place the P12 squarely in the P'08/Rev2 domain. 

[WytchCrypt]

The popular description of it as being virtually a hard-wired modular synthesizer is accurate and not an over-statement.

And this is exactly why I would never dream of selling my P12 

[Sacred Synthesis]

That makes sense to me.  It's hard to imagine needing more synthesis than the Prophet 12 can provide.

[LoboLives]

I'm still on the fence about the Prophet 12. I would get it for the more digital sounding elements, FM capabilities, and digital waveforms but I'm not sure if I'd be wasting the machine's potential. Especially for the price. I may just have to wait and see what DSI come up with next...although I don't think Dave is interested in doing digital stuff anymore. Ironic isn't it? People complained the Prophet 12 wasn't analog enough, Dave goes back to analog and now people want FM and VS synths.

[Sacred Synthesis]

There's nothing new about that.  Since the Evolvers went out of production, people have been wanting from DSI something comparable.  While they were in production, there was a degree of digital satisfaction and little interest in another new digital instrument.  Now, after a few years of the Poly Evolver being absent, talk of a PEK/VS Mk. II has increased.  And there's far more to digital synthesis than just FM.  It seems to be wavetables that most interests folks.  I think it all proves that the Prophet 12 doesn't fill the digital vacuum, and I certainly share that opinion.  A true successor to the Poly Evolver has not appeared and would be most welcome.

[LoboLives]

There's nothing new about that.  Since the Evolvers went out of production, people have been wanting from DSI something comparable.  While they were in production, there was a degree of digital satisfaction and little interest in another new digital instrument.  Now, after a few years of the Poly Evolver being absent, talk of a PEK/VS Mk. II has increased.  And there's far more to digital synthesis than just FM.  It seems to be wavetables that most interest folks.  I think it all proves that the Prophet 12 doesn't fill the digital vacuum, and I certainly share that opinion.  A true successor to the Poly Evolver has not appeared and would be most welcome.

As long as the new digital instrument included sampling abilities on one of its oscillators it could kill two birds with one stone. Why not simply take the structure of the Evolver or Tempest (two analog oscillators, two digital oscillators with wave table, VS, FM and samples. It would be the perfect machine...especially with on board sequencers...you know how the Rev2 can have two sequences going at once? Picture 4, each with a different sound.

[Sacred Synthesis]

Again, it sounds good to me, but it doesn't seem to be the direction that interests Dave.  Consider his last three instruments.

[LoboLives]

Again, it sounds good to me, but it doesn't seem to be the direction that interests Dave.  Consider his last three instruments.

I mean other than multitimbrality, I'm not sure what else he can do in the analog realm that would be mind blowing.

[Soundquest]

Sacred Synthesis, thanks for the detailed thoughts on P12/PEK comparison.   After much back-n-forth in studying this (without the fortune of hands-on like you had) I've also concluded that I would get a P12 for it's own merits, but not with the intent to try and replace a PEK.

This brings me right back to my original quandary-  What do I do if my PEK dies?    It's the most versatile and funnest instrument that I own.   Wouldn't most past, or present, owners have a similar such experience? DSI should seriously do a modern reissue of it, but please, please- leave the sequencer like it is.

[Sacred Synthesis]

Sacred Synthesis, thanks for the detailed thoughts on P12/PEK comparison.   After much back-n-forth in studying this (without the fortune of hands-on like you had) I've also concluded that I would get a P12 for it's own merits, but not with the intent to try and replace a PEK.

This brings me right back to my original quandary-  What do I do if my PEK dies?    It's the most versatile and funnest instrument that I own.   Wouldn't most past, or present, owners have a similar such experience? DSI should seriously do a modern reissue of it, but please, please- leave the sequencer like it is.

I don't think you should panic over the Poly Evolver's longevity.  Who's to say a brand new Prophet 12 will outlive it anyway?  I mean, I have two PEKs that work flawlessly, whereas, the Prophet 12 I borrowed has a few erratic encoders and one lazy note.  Yes, my ten-year-old Poly Evolvers are in better working shape.  Of course, both of our PEKs could break down tomorrow and I could end up eating my words.  I'm just not going to worry too much about the issue.  But if the worry is really getting to you, then sell the PEK now and move on to a P12.  Although it can't replace a PEK, it's a fabulous synthesizer in its own right and will keep you busy for years to come.

I'm done trying to guess what DSI will produce next (other than a Rev2 Module).  I've given up on that game because it seems impossible to logically foresee it.  I only know what I'd like them to produce, and that is...a new Poly Evolver Keyboard.  That's it; that's all I'd like from DSI.  Perhaps Tracy is right in saying that Dave won't ever do it; perhaps the Prophet Rev2 was an anomaly that will not be repeated.  Regardless, that's my last wish from them.  Their current line up is quite impressive.  There's more than enough for some one with my limited needs.  But, the exceptional digital wavetable instrument is definitely missing.  It's time for the new Revolver.  But it seems that the answer from Mr. Smith is still the same: nope.

[Mr Kay]

perhaps the Prophet Rev2 was an anomaly that will not be repeated.

Nope, actually, most of DSI buyers are touring keyboardists 

And a future Prophet VS... Dunno, the PEK had the original VS wavetables and I've never programmed a VS, but I've seen the real thing and the UI looked tedious to program compared to the PEK or the P12.

[LoboLives]

perhaps the Prophet Rev2 was an anomaly that will not be repeated.

Nope, actually, most of DSI buyers are touring keyboardists 

And a future Prophet VS... Dunno, the PEK had the original VS wavetables and I've never programmed a VS, but I've seen the real thing and the UI looked tedious to program compared to the PEK or the P12.

Exactly that's why we need a new one. Improve on the original idea.

[Sacred Synthesis]

perhaps the Prophet Rev2 was an anomaly that will not be repeated.

Nope, actually, most of DSI buyers are touring keyboardists 

And a future Prophet VS... Dunno, the PEK had the original VS wavetables and I've never programmed a VS, but I've seen the real thing and the UI looked tedious to program compared to the PEK or the P12.

Having now worked with both, I much prefer the ergonomics of the Poly Evolver Keyboard.  For one thing, the digits in the Prophet 12's window are like micro film - unbelievably tiny, due to the amount of data that is displayed.  I found myself constantly leaning forward over the instrument to see it better, and I had noticed others doing the same thing in online videos.  I don't use glasses, but the P12 made me wonder if I need them.  If anyone wants to investigate this, just experiment with naming a patch.  How easy is it to quickly discern the difference between an "n" and an "m," or an "i" and a "j"?   You can some times hardly tell unless you get up real close to the window.  I can't imagine ever tweaking the parameters in a live situation, which is perhaps one of the reasons it's been equipped with so many controllers.  Incidentally, I often found myself, when reaching for the octave shift buttons, accidentally touching the upper ends of the ribbons with my fourth finger and inadvertently sending the sound into unwanted spasms.

Contrary to this, with the PEK, I never need to lean forward, even though its control panel is deeper and, therefore, the window is about an inch further away.  The digits are so much larger.  And all the programming goes so easily and smoothly.  Granted, I've been working with the PEK for probably eight years now, so it feels natural, whereas, I've had the P12 for only a month.  I found the P12 to be a superb instrument and a joy to use, but it requires work for sure.  It's rather labor intensive.  Still, I'm seriously considering one.  It fits in really well between the Poly Evolver and Prophet '08/Rev2.  These three full-sized synthesizers would comprise an ideal set up.

Let me say this: If, like me, you have old school tastes and prefer analog character, then the Prophet 12, in spite of a million online videos that make the instrument sound - pardon me - like digital crap, then the Prophet 12 is a viable option for you.  Yes, it can obviously sound harsh, gritty, caustic, metallic, and cold - as so many videos prove.  But it can sound gorgeous as well.  By no means does it dictate a character; rather, the sound designer decides, and that's just the way it should be.  I had previously considered it to be the odd ball in the DSI line up - with all the other instruments having that classic DSI sound, but this one lacking it.  By no means.  The P12 is classic DSI.  It fits right in with the rest of the family.

[WytchCrypt]

Having now worked with both, I much prefer the ergonomics of the Poly Evolver Keyboard.  For one thing, the digits in the Prophet 12's window are like micro film - unbelievably tiny, due to the amount of data that is displayed.  I found myself constantly leaning forward over the instrument to see it better, and I had noticed others doing the same thing in online videos.  I don't use glasses, but the P12 made me wonder if I need them.  If anyone wants to investigate this, just experiment with naming a patch.  How easy is it to quickly discern the difference between an "n" and an "m," or an "i" and a "j"?   You can some times hardly tell unless you get up real close to the window.  I can't imagine ever tweaking the parameters in a live situation, which is perhaps one of the reasons it's been equipped with so many controllers.  Incidentally, I often found myself, when reaching for the octave shift buttons, accidentally touching the upper ends of the ribbons with my fourth finger and inadvertently sending the sound into unwanted spasms.

Contrary to this, with the PEK, I never need to lean forward, even though its control panel is deeper and, therefore, the window is about an inch further away.  The digits are so much larger.  And all the programming goes so easily and smoothly.  Granted, I've been working with the PEK for probably eight years now, so it feels natural, whereas, I've had the P12 for only a month.  I found the P12 to be a superb instrument and a joy to use, but it requires work for sure.  It's rather labor intensive.  Still, I'm seriously considering one.  It fits in really well between the Poly Evolver and Prophet '08/Rev2.  These three full-sized synthesizers would comprise an ideal set up.

Ironic.  The main reason I sold my PEK was I was always disappointed with the minimal amount of information displayed on the LED screen    It's display characters might have been larger and easier to read than the P12, but I wanted much more data than it displayed on a couple lines.  As far as the tiny size of the P12 font, I don't find it a problem as I have my P12 module displayed at eye level and love the sharpness of the OLED - especially when changing the osc wave shape!

[Sacred Synthesis]

You do have an ideal situation, but imagine a keyboard version with the window at the furthest point from your eyes, and perhaps another instrument on top of it casting a shadow.  As I've had the Prophet 12 set up, resting on top of my Poly Evolver Keyboard, it's way back to the point that there's no way I can see it.  It takes constant leaning forward, and after a couple of hours, it does get wearisome on the back.

I agree, the P12 window does offer a lot of information, but it seems excessive.  What is the point of displaying both a parameter's digit position and also a turning circular image of that parameter?  This is the same information given twice.  It's also intriguing to see the little envelope diagram change as you alter the four parameters, but this is at the price of sacrificing the size of the digits in general. 

It's obvious that Dave went all-out with the P12.  He pulled out all the stops, and brilliantly.  It's impressive to meet such an instrument, but there are prices to pay for such thoroughness. 

As for the Poly Evolver's window, you're right that it does offer minimal information, and I guess that's what I like about it.  It tells what you need to know and not an iota more; the rest of the information has to come from the panel. 

The P12 is heavily dependent on the window.  But one of the main reasons I chose DSI synthesizers is that they're not overly window dependent and the menu-diving is minimal.  The P12 is definitely a departure from that philosophy. 

After a month with the Prophet 12, I almost feel the need to take a vacation with a Prophet-6!

Regardless, the P12 is a great instrument and you've adapted to its strengths and weaknesses, just as I've adapted to the PEK's.  I'm being picky about something new and fascinating to me, so don't take my comments in a personal way.  The fact is, if I can manage it, I'll definitely buy a Prophet 12.

[jazzygb1]

You do have an ideal situation, but imagine a keyboard version with the window at the furthest point from your eyes, and perhaps another instrument on top of it casting a shadow.  As I've had the Prophet 12 set up, resting on top of my Poly Evolver Keyboard, it's way back to the point that there's no way I can see it.  It takes constant leaning forward, and after a couple of hours, it does get wearisome on the back.

I agree, the P12 window does offer a lot of information, but it seems excessive.  What is the point of displaying both a parameter's digit position and also a turning circular image of that parameter?  This is the same information given twice.  It's also intriguing to see the little envelope diagram change as you alter the four parameters, but this is at the price of sacrificing the size of the digits in general. 

It's obvious that Dave went all-out with the P12.  He pulled out all the stops, and brilliantly.  It's impressive to meet such an instrument, but there are prices to pay for such thoroughness. 

The P12 is heavily dependent on the window.  But one of the main reasons I chose DSI synthesizers is that they're not overly window dependent and the menu-diving is minimal.  The P12 is definitely a departure from that philosophy. 

After a month with the Prophet 12, I almost feel the need to take a vacation with a Prophet-6!

Regardless, the P12 is a great instrument and you've adapted to its strengths and weaknesses, just as I've adapted to the PEK's.  I'm being picky about something new and fascinating to me, so don't take my comments in a personal way.  The fact is, if I can manage it, I'll definitely buy a Prophet 12.

With the greatest of respect I think your problems with the display would seem to stem more from the poor ergonomic setup of your synths rather than a failing in the design of the OLED display on the P12.

I disagree too with your assertion that the P12 is heavily dependent on the window.
I think it uses the display wisely and where it proves most helpful, like to display the oscillator shapes or the plethora of modulation options for example.

I suppose you could argue the OLED display would perhaps be better placed at the bottom of the panel just above the keys, but it's physically a shallow synth so it's only a matter of a few inches difference anyway.

The only thing I'd change about the UI on the P12 is the selection/muting of oscillators with a double press of the oscillator button.

Not being able to do that is probably my biggest gripe with the P12.
That aside I think it's a spectacular synth.

Try reading and using the display on a Roland JDXA and then you'll realise how spoilt you've been.

Except for selecting Oscillator shapes and the modulation routings I don't think I really look at the display when programming, I just do it by ear like I would on most other synths.

Certainly envelopes and filters can be adjusted just using the knobs - no need for a display.

I think considering how deep the programming on a P12 goes, Dave Smith have largely got the balance right on why and what you need to use the display for.

I hope you do get one, I'm sure you'll grow to love it as much as I do.

[Sacred Synthesis]

With the greatest of respect I think your problems with the display would seem to stem more from the poor ergonomic setup of your synths rather than a failing in the design of the OLED display on the P12.

If by that comment you mean I need to better arrange my instruments, then all I can say is that there's really no other choice.  I have to set things up as I do, due to the necessities of the type of music.  Meaning, the keyboards have to be as close together as possible so that with one hand I can reach two keyboards at the same time.  That means the top keyboard is going to be sitting back a bit, which is not a problem with the instruments that have larger displays.

I realize most will disagree with me on the window theme, but I'm only expressing an opinion, so it's fine with me.  I prefer a simpler window design and larger characters, that's all.  I don't think it means I'm spoiled; I simply need to be able to easily read the information in front of me. 

Our differences are probably due to our different styles and modes of synthesizer use, but my designing requires extreme precision, so there's no way I can tweak blindly until it sounds as if a parameter position is "close enough".  There's no option for me but to constantly watch and adjust those tiny digits for the sake of exactitude.  But it's a problem I can live with, especially in light of the P12's countless strengths.

[chaparral]

I guess we all use synths uniquely. I have over 200 voices programmed and use four pedals, sure I had to strain my eyes (and ears) a little to reach this point, but now I get to play without needing to squint at the mod matrix and tend to refresh the play list before each gig (all my gigs are different). I especially like live editing both parts (A and B) of the voice at once - for slow attack, filters, delay etc knowing that the changes are temporary. Also I have not yet memorised how I set up the ribbons to change each individual voice, I just know that they tend to have a range from mild to extreme and suit the voices.
 I have become more confident with distortion and character (my last synth (DX7) had no knobs) and can always get back to my original programmed sound. I would not like to dig out the reading glasses when I use 'Cassandra', but find that I don't have to even when I have strayed far from my programmed sound.
 I have been lucky, I didn't consider ergonomics when I bought my P12, but it suits my style. I would probably struggle with any of your favourite synths to achieve similar results.

[Sacred Synthesis]

I would probably struggle with any of your favourite synths to achieve similar results.

Perhaps, or perhaps not.  I think we all adapt to the strengths and weaknesses of the instruments we decide to retain.  But it's also helpful to read blunt discussions about these instruments, rather than to hear only their praises sung.  With all the videos I've watched and all the posts I've read about the Prophet 12 (and I might have missed one), I've not come across a detailed discussion about the window characters.  So, pardon me, but here is that discussion for all who might care about it.  I've always seen this as an important aspect of a forum - giving both the plusses and the minuses about an instrument, rather than just the plusses.  In my case, this isn't a deciding factor, but it might be for others.  For such persons, this discussion offers useful information.

In my opinion, all the DSI synthesizers are superb, and I could contently make use of each and every one.  But each also has its minor shortcomings.  No matter; they can be overcome.  But isn't it helpful to know about such possible shortcomings before you order an instrument, in case you're not so fortunate as to be able to try one first?   Again, I think this forum should offer such information.  I even like that this has become something of a mild debate, which has several of us offering opposite opinions.   You may or may not like the fact, but it sure provides useful information to others who can learn about, as a result, both sides.   

[BobTheDog]

For me the display on the P12 (or P2) are so advanced compared to the PEK both in their construction and in the level of information provided I really cannot see any way that the PEK display could be seen as superior.

What exactly is better on the PEK?