The Instrument For Which I Had Hoped

[Sacred Synthesis]

They just work as a standalone monophonic synth, using their own last used pitch setting when doing glides... this result in glides that start from whatever the voice was at (in pitch) the last time it was triggered, and that will vary from 1 to 4 keypresses old.... that is why the polyglide sound like it fires in all different directions.

You would get the exact same effect with any other monophonic synth that has polychain capability... it's that simple... DSI synths are simply internally "polychained" monophonic synths.

This is close to an accurate description of DSI glide, but it isn't quite perfect.  It does describe how notes glide independently from all directions, but it doesn't explain why notes are glided to from pitches that have not been triggered.  In other words, I can hold a chord, play notes above that chord, and those additional notes will glide down from higher pitches that had not yet been struck, from a range that had not been used. 

A monophonic glide always comes from the previous note; that's easy and obvious.  But the behavior of DSI glide is more than simply the sum of the number of voices used; it's more complicated than so many monophonic instruments working at the same time.  There is a behavior in DSI polyphonic glide that hasn't been explained and that seemingly makes no sense.  It can to a degree be anticipated, but it seems to escape the understanding.

This is getting to sound a lot like a bunch of guys trying to describe love. 

[Paul Dither]

They just work as a standalone monophonic synth, using their own last used pitch setting when doing glides... this result in glides that start from whatever the voice was at (in pitch) the last time it was triggered, and that will vary from 1 to 4 keypresses old.... that is why the polyglide sound like it fires in all different directions.

You would get the exact same effect with any other monophonic synth that has polychain capability... it's that simple... DSI synths are simply internally "polychained" monophonic synths.

This is close to an accurate description of DSI glide, but it isn't quite perfect.  It does describe how notes glide independently from all directions, but it doesn't explain why notes are glided to from pitches that have not been triggered.  In other words, I can hold a chord, play notes above that chord, and those additional notes will glide down from higher pitches that had not yet been struck, from a range that had not been used. 

A monophonic glide always comes from the previous note; that's easy and obvious.  But the behavior of DSI glide is more than simply the sum of the number of voices used; it's more complicated than so many monophonic instruments working at the same time.  There is a behavior in DSI polyphonic glide that hasn't been explained and that seemingly makes no sense.  It can to a degree be anticipated, but it seems to escape the understanding.

This doesn't quite contradict Razmo's point though. I think even when you switch to a new preset, each voice still 'remembers' by which key it was triggered last. That's at least how it seems to work on the Prophet-6. If I turn the unit off and on again and activate glide, each newly triggered note rises from the lowest possible one, which would be the default. So in case of the Prophet-6, the not yet triggered note would be C0. And if you switch a preset after you already played all voices there is no not yet triggered voice anymore. Per voice it'll be the last key/note you pressed in order to trigger that voice.

[Sacred Synthesis]

Yes, I understand that.  But explain the erratic gliding down from notes that were never triggered.  I don't believe there's a default setting from above, or a note priority setting, that could cause such a behavior.

[Paul Dither]

Yes, I understand that.  But explain the erratic gliding down from notes that were never triggered.  I don't believe there's a default setting from above, or a note priority setting, that could cause such a behavior.

I can't test the behaviour on a PEK or a Prophet '08 right now. But you could just turn on your PEK or Prophet '08, switch on glide and then play a key to figure out from what note the glide is actually starting. Start by hitting the same key per voice (like middle C) and if the glide effect sounds the same in all cases, there's no randomness, but indeed something like a default pitch. To make things quick and easy, you might just check a unit that's not in polychain mode.

Other than that, I have no idea. Maybe someone from DSI can chime in on this topic.

[Sacred Synthesis]

I can't test the behaviour on a PEK or a Prophet '08 right now. But you could just turn on your PEK or Prophet '08, switch on glide and then play a key to figure out from what note the glide is actually starting. Start by hitting the same key per voice (like middle C) and if the glide effect sounds the same in all cases, there's no randomness, but indeed something like a default pitch. To make things quick and easy, you might just check a unit that's not in polychain mode.

You can be sure I did all that before I started this discussion.  And I never use polychain.

It does sound wonderfully dramatic at the right moments, but I'd like to tame it better so as to be able to use it more.

Anyways, we've discussed the glide enough.  I was hoping this thread might have a bit more of a "next new DSI synthesizer" theme, starting from my list of suggestions.

[Paul Dither]

You can be sure I did all that before I started this discussion.  And I never use polychain.

It does sound wonderfully dramatic at the right moments, but I'd like to tame it better so as to be able to use it more.

Anyways, we've discussed the glide enough.  I was hoping this thread might have a bit more of a "next new DSI synthesizer" theme, starting from my list of suggestions.

Alright. Then I have no idea why the first glides are coming from seemingly random notes on your synths.

[Sacred Synthesis]

I'll continue to study it more; this is the most I've ever analyzed the mysterious workings of DSI glide, so I probably have more to learn about it.  The challenge is that it responds differently to different situations, such as when you're using layers.  I don't remember ever before scratching my head over polyphonic glide.  It was always such a simple thing.

[chysn]

I can't experiment with these instruments, but I can speculate as to why gliding might begin from unplayed notes. If each oscillator keeps track of its last note played, then that last note memory location could be left undefined when the instrument is started*. If this is the case, it could be anything, since "undefined" is basically "random value."

Doing this on a per-oscillator basis is questionable anyway. If you play a three-note C# minor chord, say G#, C#, E, and then go up an octave and turn that into C# major with F, G#, C#, I'd think you'd want the G# to glide to the higher G#, the C# to glide to the higher C#, and the E to glide to the F. It shouldn't matter which oscillators the new notes are played on. That turns it into a hardware implementation issue and not a musical issue. But of course the software needs to be a lot smarter.

* Or perhaps when a patch is changed?

[dsetto]

Lobo,

I wanted to write that I'm not scoffing about the idea of multi-timbrality in a synthesizer. In fact, I have a workstation because I appreciate multi-timbrality. ... Whenever I've responded to this topic, my perspective has been that of being happy with the Rev2 as it was announced and is. In other words, to me, the Rev2 (and '08) is enough for the main thing I want it to be. And, that I have use for 16 voices in both a mono-timbral and a bi-timbral instrument.

I fully support multi-timbrality in a future instrument. I also fully support the Rev2 as it is. I hope I was able to communicate the nuance of my positions.

with respect,
dsetto

[dsetto]

Like a mono-synth out of Razmo's intriguing "polychained monosynth" concept, I responded to the first 2 posts, and have been entirely out of sync with the thread thereafter.

--
Honestly, the glide stuff is currently beyond me. But, it seems that Sacred Synth's glide & LFO comments seem like they can  be explained by Razmo's proposed concept. But, it's currently all beyond me.
--
On the initial post:
As a past-time, I'll stay tuned to DSI's output. (Obviously!) Because I believe compelling instruments will continue to come for quite some time. Predictions, I don't have at the moment. I don't want to want. I am good.

[LoboLives]

Lobo,

I wanted to write that I'm not scoffing about the idea of multi-timbrality in a synthesizer. In fact, I have a workstation because I appreciate multi-timbrality. ... Whenever I've responded to this topic, my perspective has been that of being happy with the Rev2 as it was announced and is. In other words, to me, the Rev2 (and '08) is enough for the main thing I want it to be. And, that I have use for 16 voices in both a mono-timbral and a bi-timbral instrument.

I fully support multi-timbrality in a future instrument. I also fully support the Rev2 as it is. I hope I was able to communicate the nuance of my positions.

with respect,
dsetto

Oh yeah man, no hard feelings at all. For me I appreciate the REV2 as well (probably going to pick up an 8 voice version after next NAMM in case DSI don’t release anything mind blowing) I just felt a bit let down when it was announced as I saw it as a step backwards or sort of too small a step forwards. I think for me it’s frustrating because it seemed everyone’s response when I mentioned multitimbrality or having a new sampler based synth is always “just get a workstation” or “just use midi”.

I am really interested with what DSI does next, I just hope it’s something completely fresh and not simply taking something in the current lineup and adding a few improvements to it (which was how I viewed the REV2).

I also hope they don’t waste the Sequential name by only having it for the Prophet 6.

[dsetto]

Cool, lobo. ... By the way, I would appreciate both those things you want. ... I know exactly the various ways I would use a hypothetical synth that's exactly like a Rev2, but with 4-part multitimbrality. It would be amazing. Including for live-performance use as opposed to sequenced. ZERO doubt how. ... And don't get me started imagining a DSI sampler. Don't need it. Don't need to want it.

[dsetto]

Sacred Synthesis,

I like the higher perspective from which you look at Dave Smith synthesizers. My understanding of how you're looking at them is to identify a few as significant pillar synths. And from that look, to guess at would/could be a new pillar synth.

If I've got that part right, what do you see as the pillar synths? (Choose a better term, of course.)
- Prophet 5 (obviously)
- Prophet VS
- Poly-Evolver Keyboard

Then, you're classifying the Prophet '08/Prophet Rev2 as distilled/distilled evolved iterations of the Poly-Evolver Keyboard.

By no means am I minimizing the value of non-pillar synths. ... And it doesn't matter whether or not this "pillar synth" concept is considered or valid. It's simply a fan's water-cooler topic.

[LoboLives]

Cool, lobo. ... By the way, I would appreciate both those things you want. ... I know exactly the various ways I would use a hypothetical synth that's exactly like a Rev2, but with 4-part multitimbrality. It would be amazing. Including for live-performance use as opposed to sequenced. ZERO doubt how. ... And don't get me started imagining a DSI sampler. Don't need it. Don't need to want it.

I suggested DSI and Pioneer take the concept of the SP 16 but instead of more beats/drums it’s keyboard oriented. Would be nice to see a new Emulator lol. A sampler with DSI filters with a great keybed. Call it the Pioneer/DSI “Imitation”

[Razmo]

Cool, lobo. ... By the way, I would appreciate both those things you want. ... I know exactly the various ways I would use a hypothetical synth that's exactly like a Rev2, but with 4-part multitimbrality. It would be amazing. Including for live-performance use as opposed to sequenced. ZERO doubt how. ... And don't get me started imagining a DSI sampler. Don't need it. Don't need to want it.

I suggested DSI and Pioneer take the concept of the SP 16 but instead of more beats/drums it’s keyboard oriented. Would be nice to see a new Emulator lol. A sampler with DSI filters with a great keybed. Call it the Pioneer/DSI “Imitation”

Sounds like the sampler I've been talking about for ages now I'd say... there still are no modern sampler with analog filters, except if you go for groovebox/drummachine types of devices... a true sampler, that allow you to deal with small looped sample snippets, and use sample-oscillators are not existent... the Waldorf Quantum will probably be the first to breach this void... unfortunately too expensive, and with a lot of other synthesis types in it...

I'd really like a sample-synth that is JUST THAT... in fact, just simply take the REV2 or P6, and exchange the oscillators with sample-oscillators, and I'd be happy... and a really well thought out storage medium and you're ready to go...

But please... both in keys and desktop versions...

[Sacred Synthesis]

Sacred Synthesis,

I like the higher perspective from which you look at Dave Smith synthesizers. My understanding of how you're looking at them is to identify a few as significant pillar synths. And from that look, to guess at would/could be a new pillar synth.

If I've got that part right, what do you see as the pillar synths? (Choose a better term, of course.)
- Prophet 5 (obviously)
- Prophet VS
- Poly-Evolver Keyboard

Then, you're classifying the Prophet '08/Prophet Rev2 as distilled/distilled evolved iterations of the Poly-Evolver Keyboard.

By no means am I minimizing the value of non-pillar synths. ... And it doesn't matter whether or not this "pillar synth" concept is considered or valid. It's simply a fan's water-cooler topic.

If I were to follow your "pillar-synth" terminolgy regarding only DSI synthesizers, I would say there are two: first and foremost, the Poly Evolver Keyboard pillar, from which came everything up to the Prophet 12.  Hence, the other pillar is the P12, from which came the Pro 2.  The PEK obviously wasn't the first Evolver, but it embodies the fullness of Evolverdom.  And directly from it came the Prophet '08 (and, therefore, the Rev2 and anything that may come from it) and all those instruments derived from the P'08.  And of course, the PEK harps back to the VS, while the P-6 harps back to the P5.

This is not to imply that the P'08 and its derivatives sound just like the analog side of the PEK.  It's simply not the case.  But the instruments certainly share the same fundamental architecture.

By the way, it had been my intention, until DSI unexpectedly retired the Poly Evolver Keyboard, to have an all-Evolver set up.  I felt the instrument offered such a broad sonic range that it would suffice by itself.  Plus, I really like the concept of having several units of a single instrument.  It produces a smooth work flow, and it looks sharp.  This would have amounted to three Poly Evolver Keyboards, two Poly Evolver Racks, and one Evolver Desktop.  I still think this set up would have worked well.  And as for looks - have you ever seen even two PEKs in a dark room?  Just gorgeous!

[LoboLives]

Cool, lobo. ... By the way, I would appreciate both those things you want. ... I know exactly the various ways I would use a hypothetical synth that's exactly like a Rev2, but with 4-part multitimbrality. It would be amazing. Including for live-performance use as opposed to sequenced. ZERO doubt how. ... And don't get me started imagining a DSI sampler. Don't need it. Don't need to want it.

I suggested DSI and Pioneer take the concept of the SP 16 but instead of more beats/drums it’s keyboard oriented. Would be nice to see a new Emulator lol. A sampler with DSI filters with a great keybed. Call it the Pioneer/DSI “Imitation”

Sounds like the sampler I've been talking about for ages now I'd say... there still are no modern sampler with analog filters, except if you go for groovebox/drummachine types of devices... a true sampler, that allow you to deal with small looped sample snippets, and use sample-oscillators are not existent... the Waldorf Quantum will probably be the first to breach this void... unfortunately too expensive, and with a lot of other synthesis types in it...

I'd really like a sample-synth that is JUST THAT... in fact, just simply take the REV2 or P6, and exchange the oscillators with sample-oscillators, and I'd be happy... and a really well thought out storage medium and you're ready to go...

But please... both in keys and desktop versions...

We can only hope. The quickness of the Korg Microsampler, the sequencing and arpegiation of the SP-16, the analog VCF and VCAs from the Prophet 6 as well as the keyboard/mod wheels of the 6 as well.

The new Korg cross has apparently nice sampling abilities...except you can't map them across the keyboard...only on the pads. What an oversight! 

[DavidDever]

Sacred Synthesis,

I like the higher perspective from which you look at Dave Smith synthesizers. My understanding of how you're looking at them is to identify a few as significant pillar synths. And from that look, to guess at would/could be a new pillar synth.

If I've got that part right, what do you see as the pillar synths? (Choose a better term, of course.)
- Prophet 5 (obviously)
- Prophet VS
- Poly-Evolver Keyboard

Then, you're classifying the Prophet '08/Prophet Rev2 as distilled/distilled evolved iterations of the Poly-Evolver Keyboard.

By no means am I minimizing the value of non-pillar synths. ... And it doesn't matter whether or not this "pillar synth" concept is considered or valid. It's simply a fan's water-cooler topic.

On the Sequential side:

• Prophet-5 / -10 / Pro-One trunk with Prophet 600 / T8 branch (mostly Curtis dual-VCO instruments with full knobby functionality)
• Max / Six-Trak / Multi-Trak / Split- or Pro-Eight (Bally voice-on-a-chip, limited-interface, multitimbral instruments)
• Digital front-end instruments: Drumtraks / Prophet 2000 / Prophet VS / Studio 440

On the DSI side:

• Evolver / Prophet '08 / Prophet-12 trunk (CEM3397-based instruments with modern PIC32-based control) with Pro-2 (discrete VCFs) and Tempest (multitimbral workstation) branches
• Prophet-6 / OB-6 (discrete VCOs/VCFs, full knobby functionality) with Toraiz AS-1 branch (limited-interface)

[timbo74]

Cool, lobo. ... By the way, I would appreciate both those things you want. ... I know exactly the various ways I would use a hypothetical synth that's exactly like a Rev2, but with 4-part multitimbrality. It would be amazing. Including for live-performance use as opposed to sequenced. ZERO doubt how. ... And don't get me started imagining a DSI sampler. Don't need it. Don't need to want it.

I suggested DSI and Pioneer take the concept of the SP 16 but instead of more beats/drums it’s keyboard oriented. Would be nice to see a new Emulator lol. A sampler with DSI filters with a great keybed. Call it the Pioneer/DSI “Imitation”

Sounds like the sampler I've been talking about for ages now I'd say... there still are no modern sampler with analog filters, except if you go for groovebox/drummachine types of devices... a true sampler, that allow you to deal with small looped sample snippets, and use sample-oscillators are not existent... the Waldorf Quantum will probably be the first to breach this void... unfortunately too expensive, and with a lot of other synthesis types in it...

I'd really like a sample-synth that is JUST THAT... in fact, just simply take the REV2 or P6, and exchange the oscillators with sample-oscillators, and I'd be happy... and a really well thought out storage medium and you're ready to go...

But please... both in keys and desktop versions...

We can only hope. The quickness of the Korg Microsampler, the sequencing and arpegiation of the SP-16, the analog VCF and VCAs from the Prophet 6 as well as the keyboard/mod wheels of the 6 as well.


Hi,

That would have the perfect elements of the sort of hardware sampler I would be interested in.

Currently using the Korg Microsampler running mono out into my Vermona filter lancet and that could easily be replaced in my setup by what you just described.

The Prophet 6 VCFs/VCAs sound like the perfect match to the sampling engine and a 61 note keybed with Mod and Pitch wheels would be great.

Not sure how the market would treat it but sounds brilliant from this end.

And the Korg Micro-samplers ease of use is definately a big plus if designing a DSI sampler! (Although some may demand more complexity)

Would fit snugly in between my Tempest and P08 also.

Cheers.

[timbo74]

I suppose to borrow the best bits from the Korg Microsampler, early Ensoniq samplers and DSI everything else and you have a very capable sampler!

Personally, I like the approach of not having to hook up an editor to get to guts of the sampling technology either.

So the balance between complexity and streamlined simplicity!

Hopefully something is in the pipeline in that regard.

That would be one sampler I would give very careful consideration to!