Rev2 Derivatives

Re: Rev2 Derivatives
« Reply #20 on: October 19, 2017, 12:31:34 PM »
I for one am not confident that there is going to be an Evolver MKII. I would just like the idea of something in that direction. I also wouldn't care about it being called Evolver Rev2 or anything like that. More generally speaking, I'd just be excited to see the return of some Evolver ingredients that didn't make it to the Prophet 12, which in turn was - if I remember correctly - described as a sort of "best of" mix based on the Evolver and Prophet '08 engines when it first appeared at Winter NAMM 2013.

Instead of something that's conceptually closer related to a mix or a "best of", I'd be excited to see a sort of antithesis to the already existing instruments, or something that contains elements that no other DSI synth provides, be it sampling capability, the import of wavetables, so-called vector synthesis, or something we can't currently think of.

What I personally always liked about the Evolver was that it had been developed without anything to prove. Dave just put together a bunch of ingredients that he thought were cool and edgy, and came up with a desktop powerhouse that people either loved or hated. There was always something uncompromising about the Evolver, also because it was obvious why Dave originally decided to call it "Noise". It's sort of his punk synth and I like the attitude behind that.

Re: Rev2 Derivatives
« Reply #21 on: October 19, 2017, 12:59:05 PM »
Oh boy, so my music room is filled with multiple units and versions of the famous "punk synth"  Great.  You made that comment just for me, Paul, I know it!

We have precious little to work with here, because the instrument you and I and others have wished for is especially digital in nature.  I agree, DSI should break out from the Prophet domain and produce something akin to the Evolver or VS, only even more digital.  The Prophet 12 is in no way that instrument.  What most struck and surprised me about it was its essential analog character.  In my opinion, the P12 is a strongly analog instrument, and in order to bring out its digital qualities, you have to work at it.  Yes, the digital wave shapes are right there begging to be used, but, in light of the entire instrument, they are so few in number.   That's why I could never actually replace a PEK with a P12.

The instrument we're suggesting is heavily digital, but Robot Heart has denied that Dave will go in that direction.  So, I think we're spinning around with our theories, and with little to go on.  I gave up on predicting DSI's next moves a couple of years ago, and I haven't been wrong since!
« Last Edit: October 19, 2017, 01:41:52 PM by Sacred Synthesis »
"Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity!"

- Henry David Thoreau

The Musical Synthesizer YouTube Channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChLGwGiRVs7rlZXnOG9_mUw

The Musical Synthesizer Blog: https://themusicalsynthesizer.wordpress.com

Re: Rev2 Derivatives
« Reply #22 on: October 19, 2017, 02:13:12 PM »
Oh boy, so my music room is filled with multiple units and versions of the famous "punk synth"  Great.  You made that comment just for me, Paul, I know it!

Exactly! No, it's just the way I see it. I'm very well aware that it is also capable of producing loads of really pleasing sounds, albeit I would describe the other side as pleasing as well, just in a different way. Also, when I refer to punk, I refer to the against the grid attitude, not the genre which became quite boring by 1977 already.

We have precious little to work with here, because the instrument you and I and others have wished for is especially digital in nature.  I agree, DSI should break out from the Prophet domain and produce something akin to the Evolver or VS, only even more digital.  The Prophet 12 is in no way that instrument.  What most struck and surprised me about it was its essential analog character.  In my opinion, the P12 is primarily an analog instrument, and in order to bring out its digital qualities, you have to work at it.  Yes, the digital wave shapes are there, but they really are so few in number.   That's why I could never actually replace a PEK with a P12.

True. And that's why I think your initial assessment of the Prophet 12 being somewhat closer related to the Prophet '08 than the Evolver is right, even though it's capable of a whole different range of sounds and offers some more bells and whistles that originated in the Evolver series.

The instrument we're suggesting is heavily digital, but Robot Heart has denied that Dave will go in that direction.  So, I think we're spinning around with our theories, and with little to go on.  I gave up on predicting DSI's next moves a couple of years ago, and I haven't been wrong since!

What has been denied was an exclusively digital instrument, and I don't think that this sort of thing is a necessity or anything anyone has actually in mind. The reason we once speculated about that was the digital filter of the feedback module. The least we can assume for upcoming self contained instruments, I guess, is that the filter section will always remain analog. And most of our brainstorming here has been rather about a different front end and according different features on top of that.

But I agree, by now DSI are well established with polyphonic analog synthesizers and the Prophet 12/Pro 2. Particularly because of the many analog synths they've offered and are still offering, it's hard to imagine, though, that there's going to be another iteration of that in 2018.

LoboLives

Re: Rev2 Derivatives
« Reply #23 on: October 19, 2017, 05:29:47 PM »
Personally speaking I would love to see more variety in DSIís catalog. I know that the instruments currently are different in their own ways but not drastically so. They are all sort of derivatives from one another. With Sequential it seemed there was a bit more variety. Just take for example Prophet 5, Prophet VS, Prophet 2000. Every one of those synths was completely different from each other.

I mean ask yours of what can DSI do next in the analog realm that isnít multitimbrality. Since Dave isnít interested in that anything else is going to be the equivalent of  Korg doing the minilogue poly synth and they following it up with a mono synth. Itíll be a step backwards or such a lacklustre step forward that it may end up stagnating the company like Moog.

Nah, DSI has to do something totally new. I know Dave wants to do something other than a Prophet so unless we are going to see the Mopho x10 or Pro 4 (a VCO based, multitimbral four voice synth) I canít think of anything else theyíd go for.

Iíll wait to see what Korg has in mind. My guess is a Korg poly/mono which will be a Minlogue and Monologue under one hood with full sized keys.

Re: Rev2 Derivatives
« Reply #24 on: October 20, 2017, 09:19:09 AM »
Personally speaking I would love to see more variety in DSIís catalog. I know that the instruments currently are different in their own ways but not drastically so. They are all sort of derivatives from one another. With Sequential it seemed there was a bit more variety. Just take for example Prophet 5, Prophet VS, Prophet 2000. Every one of those synths was completely different from each other.

The Prophet VS and Prophet 2000 are more similar under the hood than dis-similar; one could easily horde one as a parts donor for the other (with a few exceptions, e.g., custom ICs). Same applies to the Studio 440.
Sequential / DSI stuff: Prophet-6 Keyboard with Yorick Tech LFE, Prophet 12 Keyboard, Mono Evolver Keyboard, Split-Eight, Six-Trak, Prophet 2000

LoboLives

Re: Rev2 Derivatives
« Reply #25 on: October 20, 2017, 09:58:54 AM »
Personally speaking I would love to see more variety in DSIís catalog. I know that the instruments currently are different in their own ways but not drastically so. They are all sort of derivatives from one another. With Sequential it seemed there was a bit more variety. Just take for example Prophet 5, Prophet VS, Prophet 2000. Every one of those synths was completely different from each other.

The Prophet VS and Prophet 2000 are more similar under the hood than dis-similar; one could easily horde one as a parts donor for the other (with a few exceptions, e.g., custom ICs). Same applies to the Studio 440.

I mean in terms of concept. One is a sampler the other is a digital synth.

Re: Rev2 Derivatives
« Reply #26 on: October 20, 2017, 10:09:22 AM »
I've no doubt that Dave Smith will bring out new synths in the future and maybe one will be a successor to the Evolver as some on here hope.

For me I just hope they carry on as they have in the last 5 years.

They've introduced the Prophet 12, OB6, Prophet 6 and the Rev2 in that time which when you think about it is a lot of synths to come from what is essentially a boutique synth company.

The really cool thing is ALL of them are desirable quality synths, that differ enough from one another to cover a wide spectrum of tastes, yet retain the Dave Smith sound.

Think about it you have digital oscillators in the P12, voltage controlled oscillators in the OB6 & Prophet 6 (but different filters) and Digitally controlled analogue oscillators in the REV2.

And for those who don't want the synths, there are module versions of all of them.

Personally I think that's the perfect compromise.

I'd rather DSI keep to this mantra as the other manufacturers aren't able to compete with DSI for value in this world at the moment, whereas the disposable toy box world of synths is already over saturated with synths from Novation, Arturia, Korg, Roland and even Yamaha with their CS range.

There's no reason for DSI to venture there.

This is where they rule the roost IMO and if they keep ahead of the game as they have done particularly over the last 5 years or so, then hopefully they'll continue to rule for many more years to come. :)

they certainly deserve to IMO.

Re: Rev2 Derivatives
« Reply #27 on: October 21, 2017, 02:41:52 PM »
Who said anything about toy synths?  Modules such as the Evolver or Tetr4 are miles away from being toy-like.  They can provide monstrous power if you want.
"Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity!"

- Henry David Thoreau

The Musical Synthesizer YouTube Channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChLGwGiRVs7rlZXnOG9_mUw

The Musical Synthesizer Blog: https://themusicalsynthesizer.wordpress.com

Re: Rev2 Derivatives
« Reply #28 on: October 21, 2017, 04:58:31 PM »
Who said anything about toy synths?  Modules such as the Evolver or Tetr4 are miles away from being toy-like.  They can provide monstrous power if you want.

Okay toy was perhaps poor choice of words, but what I meant was the very competitive sector which the Roland Gaia & Boutiques, Novation Ultranova, Waldorf Blofeld, Yamaha Reface and korg Minilogue and the likes of this world compete in.

Like it or not that's where the Tetra was competing.

None of the above effectively compete with DSI synths at the top level, so that where DSI should keep their focus to ensure it stays that way.

In fairness in the last 5 years that seems to be exactly what they have done. 

By introducing new products and effectively being their own competition they are effectively preventing any of the big boys from muscling in on the sector too and stealing a march on them.

And if they tried they'd now have to bring out a REV2 killer - good look with that! :)

It was very smart of DSI to target the high end market when everyone else was fighting for the low.

Long may it continue! :)


Re: Rev2 Derivatives
« Reply #29 on: October 21, 2017, 05:28:55 PM »
I'm 100% in favor of big synthesizers.  All of mine have five octave keyboards.  And I, too, would like DSI to maintain the present tradition of full-sized keyboard-module pairing.  But instruments such as the Pro 2 have their place in the midst of the larger instruments.  In addition, modules can be essential components in building a massive and elaborate sound - for example, in being the sound engines for bass pedals, or else, for increasing the architecture of mono synths.  The result is a sort of hardwired modular system, something quite sophisticated, but free of patch cords.  For example, a Pro 2 supplemented by a Tetr4 or an Evolver Desktop would be a superb collaboration.  This is serious bi-timbral stereo monophonic synthesis, and modules are key to it.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2017, 05:32:30 PM by Sacred Synthesis »
"Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity!"

- Henry David Thoreau

The Musical Synthesizer YouTube Channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChLGwGiRVs7rlZXnOG9_mUw

The Musical Synthesizer Blog: https://themusicalsynthesizer.wordpress.com

Re: Rev2 Derivatives
« Reply #30 on: October 21, 2017, 05:37:29 PM »
In addition, modules such as the ones I've mentioned can be an essential component in building a massive and elaborate sound - for example, in being the sound engines for bass pedals, or else, for increasing the architecture of a mono synth.  A Pro 2 supplemented by a Tetr4 or an Evolver Desktop would be a superb collaboration.  This is serious bi-timbral stereo monophonic synthesis, and modules are key to it.

Yes but that would apply to any sound module or synth.

Any synth combined with another will make the other more powerful.

It makes no difference if the bass pedal is powered by a DSI Tetra or Korg Minilogue - what matters is you've added a source for the bass pedal.

My point is that the amount of competition in the lower sector is already very high and so products like the Tetra were always going to find it hard to compete in it, so it was a good decision to leave.

Those wanting to add extra sound sources to their Pro 2 or drive MIDI bass pedals have a plethora of synths to choose from already. :)

Re: Rev2 Derivatives
« Reply #31 on: October 21, 2017, 06:12:31 PM »
I've searched for modules for this purpose for years, and for sound, architecture, programmability, and price, nothing works like a DSI module.  If something else did, I'd be using it.  If there was a plethora of such instruments, the whole lot would be sitting in my music room, but there isn't.  And I certainly would not use a keyboard synthesizer as a sound engine for bass pedals.  That would be a waste of space and money, and it still wouldn't musically suffice.  Specifically, a Minilogue is woefully inadequate for the job.  For starts, bass pedal use requires four oscillators and LFO's and preferably three envelopes.  The tiny Korg doesn't even come close.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2017, 06:26:51 PM by Sacred Synthesis »
"Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity!"

- Henry David Thoreau

The Musical Synthesizer YouTube Channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChLGwGiRVs7rlZXnOG9_mUw

The Musical Synthesizer Blog: https://themusicalsynthesizer.wordpress.com

Re: Rev2 Derivatives
« Reply #32 on: October 21, 2017, 07:17:41 PM »
I've searched for modules for this purpose for years, and for sound, architecture, programmability, and price, nothing works like a DSI module.  If something else did, I'd be using it.  If there was a plethora of such instruments, the whole lot would be sitting in my music room, but there isn't.  And I certainly would not use a keyboard synthesizer as a sound engine for bass pedals.  That would be a waste of space and money, and it still wouldn't musically suffice.  Specifically, a Minilogue is woefully inadequate for the job.  For starts, bass pedal use requires four oscillators and LFO's and preferably three envelopes.  The tiny Korg doesn't even come close.
 

It is not true to suggest you need a 4 oscillator synth for bass pedals - you quite categorically do not.

A set of MIDI bass pedals could just as easily use a cheap GM sound module as itís sound source.

That you yourself set this as a requirement is specific to your individual needs, itís not at all true generally.

Iíll concede that the Tetra has cornered the market for people needing a 4 oscillator synth with 3 envelopes and 4 LFOs to be a sound source for MIDI bass pedals, but to say thatís a niche market would be somewhat of an understatement!

It would certainly explain why DSI chose to discontinue it - save them all the advertising costs in MIDI bass pedal player weekly if nothing else! 😏

Re: Rev2 Derivatives
« Reply #33 on: October 21, 2017, 07:32:49 PM »
Yes, of course I'm describing my own situation and perspective; I thought that was obvious.  I'm not aware of a general use of bass pedals among synthesists, so it's obviously a specialty among very few of us. 

My point is, taking the typical small-synth architecture will give you only a typical small-synth bass sound, something that may be adequate for the long sustained bass notes of electronica, but not for other types of music, such as Jazz and Classical.  Consider those bands that used bass pedals, such as Genesis.  The Moog Taurus (which I used to play) was used to add a dramatic effect, and it worked well.  But the pedal bass lines were bland in themselves and were played within one octave of notes.  This limited musicality couldn't be otherwise, since the pedals were played with the toes of one foot while standing, which made for quite a handicap. 

If you're going to play actual integral lines of music on a pedalboard, really essential parts, then you often have to add lower and upper octaves to the patch so that the lines are clear and distinct within the piece.  My most frequently used bass patch includes three different octaves, with one octave doubled.  For this sort of musical use, four oscillators are obviously the minimum, and bi-timbrality is handy as well.  Hence, the ideal is two units.  And hence, the need for smaller less expensive modules, such as the Evolver and Tetr4.

I would agree with you that, for DSI, the days of such modules are probably over.  But this leaves people like myself, who have other than the typical musical needs, without the required instruments.  I guess it forces us to look to the used market, which stinks.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2017, 08:03:47 AM by Sacred Synthesis »
"Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity!"

- Henry David Thoreau

The Musical Synthesizer YouTube Channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChLGwGiRVs7rlZXnOG9_mUw

The Musical Synthesizer Blog: https://themusicalsynthesizer.wordpress.com

Re: Rev2 Derivatives
« Reply #34 on: October 22, 2017, 02:52:30 AM »
I'm 100% in favor of big synthesizers.  All of mine have five octave keyboards.  And I, too, would like DSI to maintain the present tradition of full-sized keyboard-module pairing.  But instruments such as the Pro 2 have their place in the midst of the larger instruments.

The Pro 2 is not a small synth though, neither with regard to its capabilities nor with regard to its appearance. Physically, it's definitely among the bigger mono synths out there with its 44 keys and numerous controls. Currently, only the Minimoog offers the same amount of keys. So I'd say it's as full-sized as it can get for a mono synth with the exception of the MatrixBrute. Beyond that, it's certainly not for a small budget either. For what it does and costs, it's as much of a flagship as the Prophet 12, the Prophet-6, or the OB-6.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2017, 03:02:15 AM by Paul Dither »

Re: Rev2 Derivatives
« Reply #35 on: October 22, 2017, 08:10:40 AM »
Paul, I was putting in a good word for the Pro 2, defending it, even.  You're right, as far as mono synths go, it is a nice-sized full-featured instrument.  I think highly of it, and the argument is that I wish DSI would maintain some degree of dedication to this sort of synthesizer. 

By the way, if DSI had made a module version, I definitely would have made the Pro 2 my "quest" mono synth.  Ah well....
« Last Edit: October 22, 2017, 10:19:12 AM by Sacred Synthesis »
"Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity!"

- Henry David Thoreau

The Musical Synthesizer YouTube Channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChLGwGiRVs7rlZXnOG9_mUw

The Musical Synthesizer Blog: https://themusicalsynthesizer.wordpress.com

Re: Rev2 Derivatives
« Reply #36 on: October 22, 2017, 08:49:11 AM »
Paul, I was putting in a good word for the Pro 2, defending it, even.  You're right, as far as mono synths go, it is a nice-sized full-featured instrument.  I think highly of it, and the argument is that I wish DSI would maintain some degree of dedication to this sort of synthesizer.

When you wrote about the Pro 2 having its place "in the midst of the larger instruments", I was under the impression that you were contrasting the Pro 2 with instruments like the Prophet 12 or the Rev2, as if it was more in the tradition of something like the Mopho or Tetra. I may have misunderstood that, hence my comment. Sorry for the confusion.

Re: Rev2 Derivatives
« Reply #37 on: October 22, 2017, 10:17:40 AM »
No problem.  The discussion was for and against smaller instruments.  I'm in favor of DSI continuing to offer some variety, which would include the Pro 2-sized instrument, as well as a module like the Tetr4.  I realize it may be unlikely these days, but nevertheless, such modules filled a spot that is now vacant.  I see no other comparable modules to those produced by DSI.
"Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity!"

- Henry David Thoreau

The Musical Synthesizer YouTube Channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChLGwGiRVs7rlZXnOG9_mUw

The Musical Synthesizer Blog: https://themusicalsynthesizer.wordpress.com

dsetto

  • ***
  • 387
Re: Rev2 Derivatives
« Reply #38 on: October 22, 2017, 09:49:54 PM »
The Prophet '08 led to a whole range of instruments of smaller forms, both keyboards and modules/desktops.  It's possible the Rev2 will remain a once-off instrument, somewhat like the Prophet-6 (except for the Toraiz), but I'm wondering - and hoping - if the Rev2 might lead to other instruments derived from it.  Robot Heart has already said that it's unlikely there will be another Mopho x4 type instrument, but that still leaves room for other possibilities. I'd be happy to see a REV2 monophonic keyboard version of some type, as well as a module version parallel to the Tetr4.  These instruments could seemingly be produced now at a very reasonable price.
Rev2 derivatives sounds reasonable to me. I believe low price point products serve useful, meaningful roles. This includes both on their own, and within the context of intra-brand learning synergy. I would think income derived from derivatives can fund explorations that lead to new approaches. So, even if one doesn't directly find value in a low price point product, one may benefit from them indirectly.