New Rev2 User thoughts + sounds

[synthlove]

I've been able to spend some time with the rev2 and thought I'd share a few thoughts. I was afraid the bi-timbral use of the Rev 2 might be inconvenient to use. Overall it is not. Ideally it would be something like a JP-8000 or Nord Lead (very easy to use splits and layers). However the rev2 method is very usable.

Effects are very nice - reverbs are great. Light distortion adds a lot. Would be great to use the effects from layer b if not in use but maybe in the future. I assume all DSP so doable? Biggest surprise is the Ring Mod. I had ignored it but it adds a lot of new sonic ground. I now view all synths as their total including effects. I used to somewhat snobbishly think effects do not matter (can always add them later). This is true but overall not a good attitude. Having the ring mod gives new possibilities.

Very sad to see the artifacts with short/quick envelope settings are still there. You'll never notice it on pads and leads but a lot of my favorite basses have artifacts.

I wish there was fm but there are ways to simulate it somewhat with LFO's

Here are some patches from my first bit of playing around. They are nothing special and some are variations of the same theme as I tweak, save and tweak some more.

[AlainHubert]

What short/quick envelope settings artifacts are you talking about, may I ask ?

[dsetto]

Perhaps the artifacts you are talking about are related to very fast attack or release. I prefer hearing these artifacts and knowing these are as fast as possible, than the converse.
Also, there are ways to reduce these.

[Sacred Synthesis]

I used to somewhat snobbishly think effects do not matter (can always add them later). This is true but overall not a good attitude.

I most definitely have that "bad attitude," as you say, and it's due to the fact that I don't need more than reverb and a little bit of delay.  The somewhat simple sounds I design and use are created with the utmost care and attention to detail and nuance.  As a result, these are emphatically finished sounds and need no effects in order to serve the purpose for which they've been designed.  However, I always use reverb because I think a dry synthesizer sounds excessively electronic, and reverb goes a long way in warming it up and giving it a spacious environment of its own, just as even a symphony sounds better in a large hall, or a pipe organ in a cathedral.  But note that these latter are already excessively high-quality sounds from the start.

Contrary to this, I hear countless synthesizer patches in demos on YouTube that - in my opinion - are overtly unfinished patches, that lack character, warmth, and an in-built expressiveness, but are processed through mountains of effects, as if these could somehow compensate for poor sound design.  In fact, a Big Sky can fairly compensate for poor sound design, because it has the power to bury and, therefore, hide a lack of effort or a lack of ability on the part of the synthesist, and that's a common problem in synthesis from my perspective.

My preference is to have only delay within a synthesizer's engine, but I could live without that as well.  I definitely prefer not to have onboard chorus, phaser, and flanger, because these pose temptations to go in sonic directions I neither like nor respect.  And yet, adding them is so easy and gives an instant "coolness" to a patch, such as impresses other synthesists and wins their praise.  No thanks.  Keep those effects; I don't want them in my music.

In addition, there's always the possibility that one will not like the character of a particular onboard effect found on an instrument.  That's never been an issue for me, since even the Evolver's outdated delay is sufficient for my needs.  But I've read many comments from synthesists who, for example, didn't like the particular reverb on the Prophet-6 and would prefer another.  That makes sense, if you have a specific sound in mind. 

And last of all, there are those who dislike effects altogether and prefer to hear the raw unprocessed sound of a synthesizer.

So, there are many reasons why a "good" and "non-snobbish" attitude could include the conviction that effects are not essential to quality sound design. 

It may seem misplaced in the inherently complicated synthesizer domain, in which quantity and complexity are often held to be the chief virtues, but some of us do prefer simpler synthesizers.  Some of us actually like to have fewer options in a sound engine - only the essentials - and are even inspired by the challenge of limitation as an aid in drawing out better and less technologically-saturated music. 

[jazzygb1]

I used to somewhat snobbishly think effects do not matter (can always add them later). This is true but overall not a good attitude.

I most definitely have that "bad attitude," as you say, and it's due to the fact that I don't need more than reverb and a little bit of delay.  The somewhat simple sounds I design and use are created with the utmost care and attention to detail and nuance.  As a result, these are emphatically finished sounds and need no effects in order to serve the purpose for which they've been designed.  However, I always use reverb because I think a dry synthesizer sounds excessively electronic, and reverb goes a long way in warming it up and giving it a spacious environment of its own, just as even a symphony sounds better in a large hall, or a pipe organ in a cathedral.  But note that these latter are already excessively high-quality sounds from the start.

Contrary to this, I hear countless synthesizer patches in demos on YouTube that - in my opinion - are overtly unfinished patches, that lack character, warmth, and an in-built expressiveness, but are processed through mountains of effects, as if these could somehow compensate for poor sound design.  In fact, a Big Sky can fairly compensate for poor sound design, because it has the power to bury and, therefore, hide a lack of effort or a lack of ability on the part of the synthesist, and that's a common problem in synthesis from my perspective.

My preference is to have only delay within a synthesizer's engine, but I could live without that as well.  I definitely prefer not to have onboard chorus, phaser, and flanger, because these pose temptations to go in sonic directions I neither like nor respect.  And yet, adding them is so easy and gives an instant "coolness" to a patch, such as impresses other synthesists and wins their praise.  No thanks.  Keep those effects; I don't want them in my music.

In addition, there's always the possibility that one will not like the character of a particular onboard effect found on an instrument.  That's never been an issue for me, since even the Evolver's outdated delay is sufficient for my needs.  But I've read many comments from synthesists who, for example, didn't like the particular reverb on the Prophet-6 and would prefer another.  That makes sense, if you have a specific sound in mind. 

And last of all, there are those who dislike effects altogether and prefer to hear the raw unprocessed sound of a synthesizer.

So, there are many reasons why a "good" and "non-snobbish" attitude could include the conviction that effects are not essential to quality sound design. 

It may seem misplaced in the inherently complicated synthesizer domain, in which quantity and complexity are often held to be the chief virtues, but some of us do prefer simpler synthesizers.  Some of us actually like to have fewer options in a sound engine - only the essentials - and are even inspired by the challenge of limitation as an aid in drawing out better and less technologically-saturated music.

Not wanting something because you don't use it, isn't really a valid reason to be against it.
I don't believe using effects is cheating, anymore than using LFO's or shape Mod, filter or anything else is - it's simply another tool in your synth to achieve the sound you wish.
If you don't require them...fine, don't use them.
However to imply those who do use them are effectively 'cheating' somehow is codswallop.
There a 4 delays on my Prophet 12 (which I love) and  I achieve sounds using them that would be simply impossible without them - regardless of the competency of my programming.
You yourself say "I don't need more than reverb and a little bit of delay"which means...you need a reverb & delay!!!
And why is using a flanger to achieve a sweeping effect for example anymore 'cheating' than assigning an LFO to shape Mod?
It isn't!
I think as long as they are simple enough to be quick and not interrupt the usability of the synth then fx are always an asset.
The more tools at my disposal the better, whether I choose to use them all is up to me.
The REV2 fx are perfect in this regard. Varied enough to cover most bases, but not deep enough to require extra menu diving, you just get 3 knobs - perfect!
Of course I can choose to add fx via my DAW, but sometimes (especially live) you need them on the synth.
Long live fx!

[LoboLives]

I used to somewhat snobbishly think effects do not matter (can always add them later). This is true but overall not a good attitude.

I most definitely have that "bad attitude," as you say, and it's due to the fact that I don't need more than reverb and a little bit of delay.  The somewhat simple sounds I design and use are created with the utmost care and attention to detail and nuance.  As a result, these are emphatically finished sounds and need no effects in order to serve the purpose for which they've been designed.  However, I always use reverb because I think a dry synthesizer sounds excessively electronic, and reverb goes a long way in warming it up and giving it a spacious environment of its own, just as even a symphony sounds better in a large hall, or a pipe organ in a cathedral.  But note that these latter are already excessively high-quality sounds from the start.

Contrary to this, I hear countless synthesizer patches in demos on YouTube that - in my opinion - are overtly unfinished patches, that lack character, warmth, and an in-built expressiveness, but are processed through mountains of effects, as if these could somehow compensate for poor sound design.  In fact, a Big Sky can fairly compensate for poor sound design, because it has the power to bury and, therefore, hide a lack of effort or a lack of ability on the part of the synthesist, and that's a common problem in synthesis from my perspective.

My preference is to have only delay within a synthesizer's engine, but I could live without that as well.  I definitely prefer not to have onboard chorus, phaser, and flanger, because these pose temptations to go in sonic directions I neither like nor respect.  And yet, adding them is so easy and gives an instant "coolness" to a patch, such as impresses other synthesists and wins their praise.  No thanks.  Keep those effects; I don't want them in my music.

In addition, there's always the possibility that one will not like the character of a particular onboard effect found on an instrument.  That's never been an issue for me, since even the Evolver's outdated delay is sufficient for my needs.  But I've read many comments from synthesists who, for example, didn't like the particular reverb on the Prophet-6 and would prefer another.  That makes sense, if you have a specific sound in mind. 

And last of all, there are those who dislike effects altogether and prefer to hear the raw unprocessed sound of a synthesizer.

So, there are many reasons why a "good" and "non-snobbish" attitude could include the conviction that effects are not essential to quality sound design. 

It may seem misplaced in the inherently complicated synthesizer domain, in which quantity and complexity are often held to be the chief virtues, but some of us do prefer simpler synthesizers.  Some of us actually like to have fewer options in a sound engine - only the essentials - and are even inspired by the challenge of limitation as an aid in drawing out better and less technologically-saturated music.

Not wanting something because you don't use it, isn't really a valid reason to be against it.
I don't believe using effects is cheating, anymore than using LFO's or shape Mod, filter or anything else is - it's simply another tool in your synth to achieve the sound you wish.
If you don't require them...fine, don't use them.
However to imply those who do use them are effectively 'cheating' somehow is codswallop.
There a 4 delays on my Prophet 12 (which I love) and  I achieve sounds using them that would be simply impossible without them - regardless of the competency of my programming.
You yourself say "I don't need more than reverb and a little bit of delay"which means...you need a reverb & delay!!!
And why is using a flanger to achieve a sweeping effect for example anymore 'cheating' than assigning an LFO to shape Mod?
It isn't!
I think as long as they are simple enough to be quick and not interrupt the usability of the synth then fx are always an asset.
The more tools at my disposal the better, whether I choose to use them all is up to me.
The REV2 fx are perfect in this regard. Varied enough to cover most bases, but not deep enough to require extra menu diving, you just get 3 knobs - perfect!
Of course I can choose to add fx via my DAW, but sometimes (especially live) you need them on the synth.
Long live fx!

Agree to this. 100%.

I'd rather have the effects and not need them than need them and not have them.

Everyone's music is different so their needs are different.