The Prophet '08 Among Prophets

[Jason]

Last night I plugged in my cheap iPhone headphones that pump the bass and roll off the highs.
What a difference! The Prophet came alive with a warm and rich presence I associate with vintage synthesizers.

I had read somewhere that turning up the bass in the EQ could had some warmth to the '08, but I guess I hadn't experimented with it before. Today I turned the EQ bass from 12:00 to 3:00, and I turned the highs from 12:00 back to 11:00. I then added about five to the filter setting in order to get the brightness where I had it before. I have to say that I think you're on to something here! My initial experiments were that I liked just about all the sounds better. Keep in mind that in my typical band setting, I am not playing a lot of low notes on the Prophet, and so I was mainly testing right hand parts. I went through many of my favorite sounds with good results. The other thing that I didn't yet experiment with is using the Prophet and Module pair. Maybe making the above adjustment on one and leaving the other one straight would be the way to go?

[Paul Dither]

I had read somewhere that turning up the bass in the EQ could had some warmth to the '08, but I guess I hadn't experimented with it before. Today I turned the EQ bass from 12:00 to 3:00, and I turned the highs from 12:00 back to 11:00. I then added about five to the filter setting in order to get the brightness where I had it before. I have to say that I think you're on to something here! My initial experiments were that I liked just about all the sounds better. Keep in mind that in my typical band setting, I am not playing a lot of low notes on the Prophet, and so I was mainly testing right hand parts. I went through many of my favorite sounds with good results. The other thing that I didn't yet experiment with is using the Prophet and Module pair. Maybe making the above adjustment on one and leaving the other one straight would be the way to go?

If you use different EQ settings for two Prophets that might expand the stereo feel slightly in case you're using both on different channels. It's an old trick for when you record drums with just one overhead microphone: Duplicate the according track, pan one to the left and the other to the right while using different EQ settings on each.

[tumble2k]

I have been playing around with random modulation of pitch in a way to add some movement to the P'08's DCOs. I used dswo's techniques to lower the amount of modulation so that it is not perceptible directly. Specifically I use the following settings:

LFO 3 Freq: 149
LFO 3 Amount: 0
LFO 3 Shape: Random
LFO 3 Dest: Osc 1 Freq

LFO 4 Freq: 143
LFO 4 Amount: 0
LFO 4 Shape: Random
LFO 4 Dest: Osc 2 Freq

Env 3 Dest: LFO 3 Amount
Env 3 Amount: 1
Env 3 Delay: 0
Env 3 Attack: 0
Env 3 Decay: 0
Env 3 Sustain: Anything less than 10
Env 3 Release: 127

Mod 4 Source: Envelope 3
Mod 4 Dest: LFO 2 Amount
Mod 4 Amount: 1

So with this setup I can modulate the modulation level using the Envelope 3 Sustain knob.

For a lot of my tests I run the two oscillators slightly detuned say +-2 and the slop at low levels or off. What I find is that if the sustain level is at 10 I can start hearing the beats between the two oscillators, and it sounds lumpy and unnatural. However, if I have the sustain level below 10 I can't hear the lumpiness.

Here's the crazy part. At this low level of modulation, the P'08 oscillators *feel* more alive. I just can't prove it's so because it's really subtle; if I was doing a double blind test I probably would not be able to tell the difference. Anyway, I've set up the basic patch with these modulations as the basis for my analog emulation patches and will experiment further. If anyone else has or cares to play around with these ideas I'd love to hear about it.

[lnetzel]

I have been playing around with random modulation of pitch in a way to add some movement to the P'08's DCOs. I used dswo's techniques to lower the amount of modulation so that it is not perceptible directly. Specifically I use the following settings:

LFO 3 Freq: 149
LFO 3 Amount: 0
LFO 3 Shape: Random
LFO 3 Dest: Osc 1 Freq

LFO 4 Freq: 143
LFO 4 Amount: 0
LFO 4 Shape: Random
LFO 4 Dest: Osc 2 Freq

Env 3 Dest: LFO 3 Amount
Env 3 Amount: 1
Env 3 Delay: 0
Env 3 Attack: 0
Env 3 Decay: 0
Env 3 Sustain: Anything less than 10
Env 3 Release: 127

Mod 4 Source: Envelope 3
Mod 4 Dest: LFO 2 Amount
Mod 4 Amount: 1

So with this setup I can modulate the modulation level using the Envelope 3 Sustain knob.

For a lot of my tests I run the two oscillators slightly detuned say +-2 and the slop at low levels or off. What I find is that if the sustain level is at 10 I can start hearing the beats between the two oscillators, and it sounds lumpy and unnatural. However, if I have the sustain level below 10 I can't hear the lumpiness.

Here's the crazy part. At this low level of modulation, the P'08 oscillators *feel* more alive. I just can't prove it's so because it's really subtle; if I was doing a double blind test I probably would not be able to tell the difference. Anyway, I've set up the basic patch with these modulations as the basis for my analog emulation patches and will experiment further. If anyone else has or cares to play around with these ideas I'd love to hear about it.

Can you attach an audio sample, sounds like something I'd like to hear

[Sacred Synthesis]

In addition, the two instruments have different behaving envelopes.  I always use the linear setting on each, yet the response is different.

I didn't know about this linear setting. Can you tell me more? Or is it only an Evolver thing?

This is an old question that I remembered I hadn't answered.

Under "Misc Parameters," the Poly Evolver allows you to choose between exponential and linear envelopes  The first has a natural curve to it and is the one I usually use, whereas the second is stiff and unnatural sounding.  These settings are not available on the Prophet '08.  The surprising thing is, even though the Prophet '08 lacks the options, its single envelope setting (which I presume is exponential) is much easier to play.  It's perfect for brass patches, whereas I find brass patches on the PEK to be somewhat clumsy to play due to the envelope curve, regardless of which envelope curve I use.  It's one of the many subtle but significant ways in which the two instruments differ.

[StarskyCarr]

I have been playing around with random modulation of pitch in a way to add some movement to the P'08's DCOs. I used dswo's techniques to lower the amount of modulation so that it is not perceptible directly. Specifically I use the following settings:

LFO 3 Freq: 149
LFO 3 Amount: 0
LFO 3 Shape: Random
LFO 3 Dest: Osc 1 Freq

LFO 4 Freq: 143
LFO 4 Amount: 0
LFO 4 Shape: Random
LFO 4 Dest: Osc 2 Freq

Env 3 Dest: LFO 3 Amount
Env 3 Amount: 1
Env 3 Delay: 0
Env 3 Attack: 0
Env 3 Decay: 0
Env 3 Sustain: Anything less than 10
Env 3 Release: 127

Mod 4 Source: Envelope 3
Mod 4 Dest: LFO 2 Amount
Mod 4 Amount: 1

So with this setup I can modulate the modulation level using the Envelope 3 Sustain knob.

For a lot of my tests I run the two oscillators slightly detuned say +-2 and the slop at low levels or off. What I find is that if the sustain level is at 10 I can start hearing the beats between the two oscillators, and it sounds lumpy and unnatural. However, if I have the sustain level below 10 I can't hear the lumpiness.

Here's the crazy part. At this low level of modulation, the P'08 oscillators *feel* more alive. I just can't prove it's so because it's really subtle; if I was doing a double blind test I probably would not be able to tell the difference. Anyway, I've set up the basic patch with these modulations as the basis for my analog emulation patches and will experiment further. If anyone else has or cares to play around with these ideas I'd love to hear about it.

Interesting...

I've tried many times to increase the movement in the DCOs - pitch is the only real way here, although you can also add a bit of randomness to the filter I suppose. 

I've attached a screen grab of the settings I've used based on these values - but the most important change I suppose is that I've used Env 3 as an irregular LFO by modulating its attack and decay with LFO1 and LFO2

This works well for strings as it increases the apparent slop without really noticeable artefacts. Play the oscillators independently and you can hear they're well and truly f**ked up together it just sounds richer.

I also have slop on 5, and modulate the Osc mix with the amp envelope - to alter the volumes of the osc through the held notes. The amp envelop also modulates LFO4, which I've changed to a sawtooth.  This changes the speed of LFO 4 without glitching.

Of course I've now used up a while host of modulation options - all my LFOs, env 3 and all the mod busses !!

I've always thought the slop does't go far enough - I want a knackered old battered bit of kit sometimes!!  The P6 slop is much more effective - so effective that it's an effect in itself when turned to maximum.  Why it only goes to 5 and not 11 is beyond me.

I've tried using slower LFOs and low amounts - but the amount is never fine enough  - it's either non existent or far too much.  It'd be useful to have Env 3 Sustain as a modulation destination as the modulation control amount could be randomised as I've done in this patch but with changing attack and decay values to give an irregular slew.

I think we should petition DSI to give us another update with increased slop... not sure how to go about it though

[StarskyCarr]

For anyone who's interested...

Here's a comparison of 2 patches - one without all the additional mods for instabilities, and one as per my previous post.  The settings are pretty much identical on both - but I've adjusted the filter slightly on the standard patch to try to match how the modded one 'sounds' as it's being modulated around the principle value.

I've detuned both to Oc1 -3 and Osc2 +6 - this was because with the previous settings the un-modded patch was far too dull in comparison so this makes it more realistic 'test'.

Nothing scientific about this - just seeing if the movement is increased favourably with the extra programming... if I can do it then surely DSI can add something similar to their slop algorithm?

[tumble2k]

Sorry Inetzel I have not been able to provide any audio samples yet. We have a newborn in the house and I don't get to play the '08 much these days.

Thanks for the followup Sacred Synthesis. I think I read somewhere that the Prophet '08 envelopes are exponential with hand tuning.

StarskyCarr, this is interesting and a clever use of envelope 3 as an LFO. I will listen carefully when I get a chance. The slop approach is to modulate the oscillator frequency with a slow random walk. What I was trying to accomplish (and I'm not sure if I was successful) is to add a small amount randomness on a per cycle basis to the oscillator frequency, which is why I'm running the LFOs as fast as I can. I think that in a real VCO both effects are present. One problem with my approach is that there's some limit to the frequency resolution on a DCO, and I may be running into that.

Anyway I'll do my best to get some samples out soon.

[Mickeyziggyk]

Thanks, Dswo.

I rarely spend time any longer on the other synth forums, but today I stopped by the Moog Forum.  There's an interesting thread on the Prophet-6.  It was mostly positive, but even in the midst of the kind words directed towards DSI, there were the usual criticisms of the Prophet '08 and its "thin" tone.  I'm glad I don't consider such comments to be worth a cow flop, and it reminded me of something I've wanted to post for a while, I suppose somewhat ironically.

If you're trying to make a decision about musical instruments, take the forums very lightly.  They can serve the purpose of providing additional information to company and music store websites, but the voluminous comments and opinions can confuse and lead you astray when it comes to making an actual decision - the decision that is right for you.  I have found far more bad advice on these forums than good, and been led in the wrong direction more often than the right.  People often suggest that you do or buy what they would do or buy, and give advice that suits their interests, as if you would benefit from being them.  I would say, if you're trying to make a gear decision, eliminate or at least limit this mass of forum twaddle, be selective in what you read, and go light on opinions and heavy on facts.   Spend your time analyzing your own needs and comparing them with each instrument's capabilities.  Careful private research based entirely on facts is far more beneficial than reading a thousand opinions and then trying to come up with their average.  YouTube videos are very helpful, even if the sound quality is only moderate.  But cut way down on the volumes of viewpoints, which can cloud your thinking.

I say this recalling all the warnings I've come across the past seven years concerning the Prophet '08's and Poly Evolver's dreadfully bad Curtiss filters, thin tone, and etc.  Right.  I am sooooo happy with these instruments, and if I had taken too seriously this mass of negative opinions, I wouldn't have bought them; I would have bought, instead, what was right fro some one else. 

I've been fortunate enough to be able to consult with a few knowledgeable pals on this forum, such as Paul Dither, and it's been both helpful and enjoyable.  But most of what is found on the forums in general strikes me as utter rubbish when it comes to clarity of thought, so that going against the tide has been the wiser method of making right decisions.  There's much to be said for a generous amount of self-reliance when making these decisions.

Right on.
Just got a Prophet 08 and after an initial hump ('why does this synth not sound like synths I've used before?'), I now love it. To the point that it has a bigger smile on my face than buying a Wurlitzer EP200.

The filters are not weak, bad or anything like that. What they are are precise tools for sculpting musical tones. The 2 pole mode is amazing, especially at full resonance, this is where the juju is. Before I read the same thing in this post, I'd found this last Sunday and it made me chuckle that folks dismiss the filters. Although I can understand this synth is not for everyone, and that's good too.

It can do squelchy sounds and dial-a-synth tones, but it has already taken me far further than any other instrument I have ever played (except a Bluthner baby grand). It can make emotional sounds full of subtle and wild movement; with no fx (especially anywhere after middle c).

I've had it less than a week, so I am in a honeymoon period, but I feel that the Prophet 08 is not about making synthy sounds, it's about making musical sounds that just so happen to be generated via subtractive synthesis topology.

[Sacred Synthesis]

I'd be proud to put my name to your post, Mickey.  Very well said.  Yes, the secret to appreciating the Prophet '08 is in seeing it as nothing other than a Prophet '08.  It's not a this and it's not a that; it's not a Prophet 5 or a Prophet 600, or any other SC instrument.  Nor is it merely the extracted analog side of the Poly Evolver. It's simply and purely a P'08.  Start there, and you'll be thrilled with the music and sound that can be made with it.

[eXode]

I would have loved to see a random source in the mod matrix that acted per voice. I have a couple of VA soft synths and some of them has that random source, and it's a very simple and efficient way to get some natural detuning between voices by simply routing random to main pitch with a small value (each note in a chord will have it's own static random value assigned). I'm sure that random would have worked really well with the P'08 as well.

[jdt9517]

I'm new to the forums here.  I bought my P-08 about a year ago and just  bought a Pro 2.  Love both of them.  This thread has been very interesting for me.

A little about my background.  I was heavily involved in the music scene in Los Angeles during the '70's and '80's.  Did a lot of recording work and played keyboards for "star acts" of the time.  I was known as an electronic keyboards guy then.  I had two Sequential keyboards - a P5 and a Pro One.  Loved the P5, the Pro One not so much.

I made a change of careers in the late '80's due to a fairly radical change in the music industry in that decade.  I was glad that I made the change, but still miss the work.  Sold my P5 and Pro One back then (major mistake). 

I remember that I was losing fondness of the P5 because it didn't have the brightness of the newer digital keyboards, e.g., DX-7.  The P5 was losing favor generally then because its sound was dated.  I regret now selling it, but it seemed like the right thing to do at the time.

Fast forward 30 years - I started getting back into electronic keyboards more for hobby than anything now.  I investigated the keyboards that were out and decided to try a P-08.  Did not play one before ordering it on line.  Based upon the reviews, I thought it was a good risk.  Have had it for about a year now.

I'm glad I bought it.  What was striking to me was that the P-08 felt so much like the P5.  However, it was like Dave Smith had gone into my memory and addressed all the shortcomings I felt about the P5 and fixed them.   The oscs were "brightened" to about the level I thought they should have been in 1985.  Touch sensitivity is great.  I don't think any of us back then appreciated MIDI but now it is essential.  I would have liked to see more of the "poly mod" features retained, but the new modulation features definitely do well.

What others have said on this thread are true - one must approach the P-08 as its own instrument and not try to compare it to others.  With that said, I look at the P-08 as a worthy successor to the P5 and really a superior overall instrument. 

[Sacred Synthesis]

Now there's an interesting viewpoint.  The Prophet '08 just isn't a Prophet 5; Oh no, it's better than a Prophet 5!

Way back, when I was playing in bands in the 80's, I couldn't afford a P5.  The best I could afford was a Juno 60, and I'm glad for it.  Even if I wanted to, I couldn't now compare a P5 to a P'08.  So, it's been easy to take the latter instrument as it is, without any expectations or mental comparisons to spoil the appreciation of it.  I've read so many posts on various forums that speak badly of the P'08, seemingly for the one reason that it just doesn't measure up to the P5 standard.  I definitely understand the pristine analog ideal and share it myself, but every analog instrument can approach it in different ways.  That is, there doesn't have to be a single analog ideal or standard.  The Moog sound is miles away from the ARP sound, and yet, both are classic analog standards.  That's the way it should be - a certain width to the analog character.  Hence, there is plenty of room for both the P5 and the P'08 within a broad analog standard, without one in any way infringing on the other.  It's the same with the P'08 and the new P6.  There's plenty of room for both.

 

[tumble2k]

Sadly I never owned a P5. I was too young to afford anything like that back in the day. However, when I listen to recordings of the P5 (specifically the ones done by Katsunori Ujiie) I find that the 40 year old P5 has a dark sort of sound that's closed in the highs, which definitely sounds dated, but it also sounds wonderful in its way. I find it interesting that the same is said of vintage audio amplifiers from that era. The highs were definitely lacking. I think the Compact Disc changed all of that in the audio industry just as the DX-7 changed it in the synth industry. There is a difference in the quality of the capacitors, especially at certain value ranges where they now use polystyrene and polypropylene instead of electrolytics. The newer caps are definitely better at reproducing the high frequencies.

I've been fiddling with my P'08 for a few months now sometimes getting good sounds and sometimes not. I've always found the filter somewhat grating, but better when I played it through an old school amplifier that cut the highs and boosted the bass somewhat. Last night I realized (I think the word might be rediscovered) that I might be overdriving the output stage of the P'08 because of the output level was set too high. The default voice has the level set to 127, and yes, that does drive the output hard to the point it's slightly clipping.

When I dialed the output level down (to a very conservative value of 90) I found that the filter smoothed out quite considerably. Gone was the tendency to go instantly from too bright to muffled. The P'08 is definitely brighter than the P5 in the video, but in a nice modern way, as if the output stages aren't cutting everything off above 12kHz or so.

I opine that the bad rap the P'08 filter gets is due to the output clipping. I'm still playing with the overly stable DCO question but my results are inconclusive. I still owe Inetzel a recording, which will be improved now that I have the output level set correctly. I may need to get a P6 to find out what VCOs bring to the party that DCO's don't, if anything.

[dswo]

I've been fiddling with my P'08 for a few months now sometimes getting good sounds and sometimes not. I've always found the filter somewhat grating, but better when I played it through an old school amplifier that cut the highs and boosted the bass somewhat. Last night I realized (I think the word might be rediscovered) that I might be overdriving the output stage of the P'08 because of the output level was set too high. The default voice has the level set to 127, and yes, that does drive the output hard to the point it's slightly clipping.

When I dialed the output level down (to a very conservative value of 90) I found that the filter smoothed out quite considerably. Gone was the tendency to go instantly from too bright to muffled. The P'08 is definitely brighter than the P5 in the video, but in a nice modern way, as if the output stages aren't cutting everything off above 12kHz or so.

I opine that the bad rap the P'08 filter gets is due to the output clipping. I'm still playing with the overly stable DCO question but my results are inconclusive. I still owe Inetzel a recording, which will be improved now that I have the output level set correctly. I may need to get a P6 to find out what VCOs bring to the party that DCO's don't, if anything.

Very interesting! I've been working on guitar recently, so my P08 hasn't had much love. But I'd be curious to hear what others think of this.

[Sacred Synthesis]

Tumble2K, that's a very fortunate discovery on your part.  I hope it gives you a fresh start and transforms your view of the Prophet '08 sound. 

I must confess that, contrary to an Internet full of complaints, I've liked the P'08 filter right from the start.  I've always been mystified by the excessive belly-aching about it, as if it made the most dreadful sound on earth.  In fact, the thought of getting an instrument without a 2-pole option concerns me, since I so frequently use that setting and have adopted it as my personal sound.  I love the P'08's filter and find that it covers the sonic range from bright and bristly to dark, warm, and mysterious. 

One of my favorite practices is to find the P'08 filter's most characteristic qualities and then emphasize them.  That often leads to a brass patch - the very type of patch that rates high on the forum irritation scale.  When I come across another complaint, I follow what they're claiming, try to reproduce the same sound even to an exaggerated degree, and then find myself liking the instrument more than ever!  It's become a sort of sport for me.

[jdt9517]

Now there's an interesting viewpoint.  The Prophet '08 just isn't a Prophet 5; Oh no, it's better than a Prophet 5!

This is true.  I'm sure I've read the same posts and threads which pan the P-08 compared to the P5.  I just wonder how many of those people actually worked with a P5 and got to know it on a fairly deep level - and learned its limitations. 

I loved the instrument, and it helped me make a very good living during the '80's.  I bought it in 1980.  It was a Rev. 3.0 with 40 memories.  Paid $3200 for it (which is about $7k in today's dollars).  The keyboard was in such high demand that I was getting calls for gigs and sessions just because I had the P5.  It paid for itself very quickly.   I previously had some ARP instruments and learned how to program.  The P5 was a piece of cake to learn.  Having polyphony and memory made it a dream machine.  So, between having a P5 and knowing how to program it made me very popular.

Then the DX-7 came out.  The sounds were absolutely amazing compared to anything previous.  The keyboard was touch sensitive and had 16 voices.  The P5 started feeling dated really fast - especially the lack of touch sensitivity.  Also, in those days you always had to have the latest toys to work.  I found the P5 sitting in the closet more and more while the digital revolution took hold.   The DMX and the DX-7 became my mainstays.

Just before I sold the P5, I remember A/B-ing the two instruments for sound.  The DX could do most of the what the P5 was popular for and sounded better.  The P5 sounded comparatively dull and lackluster.  I ended up selling the P5 for $900.  Should have never sold it.  I still have my DX from that era.  Really should have kept the P5 too.

When I bought the P-08 I did the same A/B that I had done 30 years before with the same DX.  I was pleasantly surprised how vibrant the P-08 sounded next to the DX.  The P5 couldn't hold a candle to the DX.  My love affair with analog was coming back.  Touch sensitivity!!  That in itself makes the P-08 light years ahead of the P5. 

The P5 was an amazing instrument for its time.  It can't compare to a P-08, however. 

Sacred Synth - I listened to your Youtube tracks and you are doing amazing stuff!  I love what you are doing.  BTW, a lot of what you are doing could not have been done on a P5.  For your own work, think about taking away MIDI and touch sensitivity.  How far would you get?  A P5 can have some basic MIDI elements retrofitted, but AFAIK not touch sensitivity. 

If I had a choice of a P5 or a P-08 for my workhorse synth, it would be the P-08 in a heartbeat.  I know this time that I will not make the mistake of selling by P-08!

[jdt9517]

I must confess that, contrary to an Internet full of complaints, I've liked the P'08 filter right from the start.  I've always been mystified by the excessive belly-aching about it, as if it made the most dreadful sound on earth...

Me too.   I spent a couple hours at Guitar Center and played the P6.  Aside from the onboard effects, I wondered what all the hubbub was about.  I think the P6 is a step backwards from the P-08.  I understand the nostalgia which is driving it, and the touch sensitivity helps, but the P-08 is still more capable.

BTW, you have done a great job of bringing out the best of the P-08.  I started playing with how you use of the 12db filter and its amazing!    That's another thing the P5 could not have done. 

[jdt9517]

I opine that the bad rap the P'08 filter gets is due to the output clipping. I'm still playing with the overly stable DCO question but my results are inconclusive. I still owe Inetzel a recording, which will be improved now that I have the output level set correctly. I may need to get a P6 to find out what VCOs bring to the party that DCO's don't, if anything.

Very interesting! I've been working on guitar recently, so my P08 hasn't had much love. But I'd be curious to hear what others think of this.

I'm gonna try this too.  Makes a lot of sense.

[tumble2k]

I finally made a short recording of jittering the oscillator frequencies. The sound is a basic two-oscillator sawtooth slightly filtered detuned by one cent. Slop is set to zero. I attempt to play the same silly phrase twice. The first time there is no oscillator jitter. The second time I used an extremely small amount of noise modulation to jitter both oscillators. I had to use dswo's trick of modulating the modulation amount to get the amount low enough that it wasn't completely distracting.

I think the two takes sound slightly different. Does the second one sound like a VCO synth? I honestly have no idea because I haven't critically listened to a VCO synth enough to know what makes a VCO sound like a VCO. I also don't know if the jitter is important at all if I detune the oscillators more and add slop. Right now I'm playing around with all of these settings, but I'm not convinced the effect really works or is pleasing.