The Official Sequential/DSI Forum

Rev2 breakup

maxter

  • ***
  • 354
Re: Rev2 breakup
« Reply #20 on: January 15, 2019, 01:03:44 PM »
...you need to have patience enough to let a product mature...


That's a totally new approach for me, which is probably the reason for my whining. I'm not really used to that. Dang, how did synthesizer companies manage back when?  :o

I just feel like I've been waiting for the synth I thought I bought for some time now. It was kind of a WTF moment when I got it, of course my unit hadn't been updated at all by then, but anyway. Like wow, how did they release it like this? I imagine quite a few potential customers turning it down after trying it out in the store. It was quite a turn-off for me, and I haven't touched it for some time now. But yeah, I'm still holding on for now, hoping it'll materialize in the near future.
The Way the Truth and the Life

Razmo

  • ***
  • 2168
  • I am shadow...
    • Kaleidoscopic Artworks
Re: Rev2 breakup
« Reply #21 on: January 15, 2019, 01:37:22 PM »
...you need to have patience enough to let a product mature...


That's a totally new approach for me, which is probably the reason for my whining. I'm not really used to that. Dang, how did synthesizer companies manage back when?  :o

I just feel like I've been waiting for the synth I thought I bought for some time now. It was kind of a WTF moment when I got it, of course my unit hadn't been updated at all by then, but anyway. Like wow, how did they release it like this? I imagine quite a few potential customers turning it down after trying it out in the store. It was quite a turn-off for me, and I haven't touched it for some time now. But yeah, I'm still holding on for now, hoping it'll materialize in the near future.

It's a bit ambivalent for me as well... but with synths this complex in software, it would take a lot of testing before release, which may be the problem so many bugs are found to begin with...

So I'm not saying what I am to make you feel that "this is right"... probably rather "that is how it is ... with Sequential products" ;) ... there will almost always  be bug fixes starting right after a release... I've seen it countless times by now...

The ideal situation would be that they test it a lot more before release, but I'm not sure how possible that is with a small company like Sequential... it's probably cheaper to handle the bugs when the complaints start raining in ;)... But I can imagine that the code is cumbersome, and that all cases cannot possibly be found before a release... people get more and more demanding wanting deep engines and loads of features... it makes them more complicated to make, and thus more bugs will thrive...

I personally do not mind bugs... but I mind if they do not fix the ones they KNOW about... that's my oldest grudge with Sequential dating all the way back to the infamous Evolver MIDI bugs...
« Last Edit: January 15, 2019, 01:45:29 PM by Razmo »
If you need me, follow the shadows...

Re: Rev2 breakup
« Reply #22 on: January 15, 2019, 03:17:09 PM »
To Razmo who wrote:  I do not believe that there is a bug-free synthesizer out there... 

The Ensoniq SQ-80, which offers a pretty sophisticated software, is 100% bug free. The Korg DW8000, which is not as powerful, also has a bug free software. And probably many other synths from that era.

Mostly because back in those days, programmers had no choice to do their job right the first time before commiting to mask ROM.

And its pretty ironic that the REV2 would have MIDI bugs, from the company of the founder of MIDI...
Minimoog D (vintage), OB6 (Desktop), Oberheim Matrix-6 (MIDI Controller), Prophet REV2-16, DeepMind 12, VC340

Sleep of Reason

Re: Rev2 breakup
« Reply #23 on: January 15, 2019, 04:20:50 PM »
It might very well be Behringer's upcoming UB-Xa.

Why? I mean, putting their questionable business practices aside, their products have a low quality feel that matches their price tag. Nor is any CEM era OB considered by most connoisseurs as the pinnacle Oberheim sound.

P.S. I still don't get what's so special to you about the DM12 sound. It's supposedly a Juno 60 knockoff, but so what...

Re: Rev2 breakup
« Reply #24 on: January 15, 2019, 05:43:53 PM »
Have you send a support ticket about the B layer stopping on receiving a program change? If that is a bug, they need to put it on their bug list... They always say that you should contact support... It is not enough just writing in here about it...
Yeppers, support was contacted and a ticket opened, then closed without real acknowledgment of the issue or desire to fix it.  This was the same kind or response I got a few months ago when I opened a ticket concerning no aftertouch on layer B.  After providing MIDI-OX data to prove it wasn't just misconfiguration on my end, they then closed the ticket stating the Rev2 is "working as intended."

psionic11
Jan 12, 2019, 3:01 PM (3 days ago)
to Sequential

Argghh!!

Rev2 not playing well with MIDI.  It will receive program changes from the Kronos only if the Kronos is on the same MIDI channel as the Rev2.  But there is no separate global or control channel on the Rev2 as in other synths...

<edited for brevity>

The Rev2 will play its own two timbres, as well as trigger the corresponding MIDI channels on the Kronos, which has bass timbres on ch2 and leads on ch3.  But when the split program is selected via external program change, layer B's volume is set to 0.....!


Mark Kono (Sequential Technical Support) via zendesk.com
Jan 14, 2019, 9:58 PM (22 hours ago)

Your request (#46706) has been deemed solved. To reopen, reply to this email or follow the link below:
http://support.sequential.com/hc/requests/46706

Mark Kono, Jan 14, 18:58 PST:
Hi Andrew-

As the Rev2 stands, it is a complete instrument unto itself. To use it as a dedicated MIDI controller would lack aspects most people need since it's architecture is not malleable in terms of changing MIDI data. You can check the MIDI implementation at the end of the manual for all information regarding this. I do not have any personal suggestions for an instrument that can not only play all the sounds you are looking for as well as act as a complete MIDI controller. I hope you find the instrument you are looking for that covers all this territory but still continue to use the Rev2.
Moog One <> Prophet Rev2 16V <>  Andromeda <> Kronos 61 <> Nord Stage 2 HA76 <> Integra 7 <> Minilogue XD module <> Blofeld desktop <> Behringer Model D <> Minitaur <> Slim Phatty <> Matrix 1000 <> Micron <> Privia PX-5S <>  MODX7 <> TG77 <> ASM Hydrasynth <> Perform VE <> FCB1010

Re: Rev2 breakup
« Reply #25 on: January 15, 2019, 06:10:39 PM »
It might very well be Behringer's upcoming UB-Xa.

Why? I mean, putting their questionable business practices aside, their products have a low quality feel that matches their price tag. Nor is any CEM era OB considered by most connoisseurs as the pinnacle Oberheim sound.

P.S. I still don't get what's so special to you about the DM12 sound. It's supposedly a Juno 60 knockoff, but so what...

Behringer has a range of products with quality ranging from cheapo to excellent.  The FCB, BCR, and BCF are excellent deals and highly used and sought after products for a great price.  They have MIDI implementation that far surpasses many manufacturer's products, present company included.

-- multiple, assignable MIDI DIN ports with selectable MIDI/USB merge/thru
-- 7 and 14-bit MIDI (absolute and relative), CC, NRPN, SYSEX, note, clock, MMC
-- on the FCB, up to 4 distinct commands can be sent on multiple channels
-- assignable channel and polyphonic aftertouch per MIDI channel and/or note (BCR/BCF)

Not bad for under $200 each.

And the M32 range, the XR series, the Boog D, and the DeepMind have great reputations and deliver much functionality and quality for the price.  More telling is that the first community sample pack available for the Prophet X is the Behringer Neutron pack.  No need to hate on Behringer when plenty Sequential users love some of their products.  Personally, I'm expecting the UB-Xa to deliver in spades, complete with aftertouch, bi-timbrality, and decent MIDI implementation.

« Last Edit: January 15, 2019, 06:35:42 PM by psionic11 »
Moog One <> Prophet Rev2 16V <>  Andromeda <> Kronos 61 <> Nord Stage 2 HA76 <> Integra 7 <> Minilogue XD module <> Blofeld desktop <> Behringer Model D <> Minitaur <> Slim Phatty <> Matrix 1000 <> Micron <> Privia PX-5S <>  MODX7 <> TG77 <> ASM Hydrasynth <> Perform VE <> FCB1010

Sleep of Reason

Re: Rev2 breakup
« Reply #26 on: January 15, 2019, 06:41:18 PM »
PS.  Who said the OB-Xa is the pinnacle of the OB sound, and why even bring that up?  And why are you denigrating what someone else finds appealing in a synth?

No one did as it's a CEM era OB, which is why I'm asking what the excitement is all about, especially since I've seen Alan denounce plenty of CEM products. Obviously it depends on what CEM filter is in question, but the usual gist is that aside from stability, synths sounded better prior to their implementation. E.G. Prophet 5 rev1&2, SEM Oberheims, etc.

I've found that 99% of the time you get what you pay for. People want cheap products instead of saving their pennies for quality over quantity. Besides, it's not easy to condone what B are up to and you might want to look up their actions towards Dave, so why should they get sympathy here?

People are certainly allowed to like what they like. That said, this entire thread is "denigrating", thus who cares if I ask what the fuss is about a cheap knock off (the DM12) of a cheap synth from yesteryear? It just happens to be one of their less egregious recent efforts. 
« Last Edit: January 15, 2019, 07:26:31 PM by Sleep of Reason »

Re: Rev2 breakup
« Reply #27 on: January 15, 2019, 07:24:47 PM »
PS.  Who said the OB-Xa is the pinnacle of the OB sound, and why even bring that up?  And why are you denigrating what someone else finds appealing in a synth?

No one did as it's a CEM era OB, which is why I'm asking what the excitement is all about, especially since I've seen Alan denounce plenty of CEM products. Obviously it depends on what CEM filter is in question, but the usual gist is that aside from stability, synths sounded better prior to their implementation. E.G. Prophet 5 rev1&2, SEM Oberheims, etc.

I've found that 99% of the time you get what you pay for. People want cheap products instead of saving their pennies for quality over quantity. Besides, it's not easy to condone what B are up to and you might want to look up their actions towards Dave, so why should they get sympathy here?

People are allowed to like what they like, but this entire thread is "denigrating", thus who cares if I ask what the fuss is about a cheap knock off of a cheap synth from yesteryear?

I've got a Boog D for less than $350 which sounds awesome, pretty much identical to the $3500(!) Moog Model D.  On the other hand, my $8000 Moog One is not fully blossomed yet, and while it thrills in some areas, it leaves much to be desired in others.  In some ways, the $350 Boog D is more immediately satisfying than the $8k One; it's simple, direct, small, and great sounding, serving as a reference point when programming on the One.  So I don't think it's a fair or even generally correct assumption to always assume price equals quality, in the synth world or beyond.  Generally, quality comes with a price, but there are definitely bargains to be found, and expensive shams to avoid.

Further, I don't condone what Uli did when he tried to legally claim defamation merely on the opinions of some posters here at DSI.  I find it distasteful and of poor judgment.  But I don't really care that much for politics anyway.  Bottomline is if a product sounds good, it sounds good, no matter the sins of the father. 

Lastly, this thread is not denigrating the Rev2.  Complaining and a bit demanding, perhaps, but certainly not hostile.  I personally like most of the Rev2, as I'm sure many of the other divorcees in this thread did at one point.  It's certain features that we're complaining about, not the whole synth. 
Moog One <> Prophet Rev2 16V <>  Andromeda <> Kronos 61 <> Nord Stage 2 HA76 <> Integra 7 <> Minilogue XD module <> Blofeld desktop <> Behringer Model D <> Minitaur <> Slim Phatty <> Matrix 1000 <> Micron <> Privia PX-5S <>  MODX7 <> TG77 <> ASM Hydrasynth <> Perform VE <> FCB1010

Sleep of Reason

Re: Rev2 breakup
« Reply #28 on: January 15, 2019, 07:34:00 PM »
You're questioning my opinion and I'm questioning Alan's. No harm in either.

Razmo

  • ***
  • 2168
  • I am shadow...
    • Kaleidoscopic Artworks
Re: Rev2 breakup
« Reply #29 on: January 16, 2019, 02:58:23 AM »
To Razmo who wrote: I do not believe that there is a bug-free synthesizer out there...

The Ensoniq SQ-80, which offers a pretty sophisticated software, is 100% bug free. The Korg DW8000, which is not as powerful, also has a bug free software. And probably many other synths from that era.

Mostly because back in those days, programmers had no choice to do their job right the first time before commiting to mask ROM.

And its pretty ironic that the REV2 would have MIDI bugs, from the company of the founder of MIDI...

Yes... but these old synths are also a lot less complex softwarewise... you have to consider that todays synths are VERY deep, and the more complicated and deep, the greater the chance for bugs... and also the time needed to test the synth... even if Dave is the inventor of MIDI, he cannot be perfect... he'll make bugs as everyone else does.

Sure they can test it more, and eliminate more bugs... but to cover ALL combinations of uses of such an imense and deep unit is just impossible... personaly I'm ok with that... as long as they do swift fixes, and fix ALL the bugs they know of... i can't stand their "Low Visibility Bug" comments people are given... the way they chose between the bugs to fix on Tempest made me seriously angry really... they left in some serious MIDI DIN bugs on Tempest that they knew very well about, but decided not to fix them... also minor screen bugs got neglected... I think that's a shame... such fine synths and drummachine, and then they do not polish their gems... but I feel they have gotten better at fixing bugs lately... it's been a while since I've seen such coments as "low visibility bug" or "expected behavior" as answers to problems they do not want to fix.
If you need me, follow the shadows...

Razmo

  • ***
  • 2168
  • I am shadow...
    • Kaleidoscopic Artworks
Re: Rev2 breakup
« Reply #30 on: January 16, 2019, 03:01:26 AM »
Funny... today I received a message from someone who wonders why my new soundbank has layer B button lit up, but no sound seems to come from that layer.... all my programs with layer B on, has an essential sound in them, so it seems that there must be a bug with Layer B still... in fact when I recall back, Layer B seems to often be the problem in bug reports, and have been for a long time... I advised the guy to make sure he was not changing programs using MIDI, and to write me back about what he finds... we need to inform Sequential about this B problem... have anyone here sent a bug report to support about this problem, and had it confirmed and put on the bug list?
If you need me, follow the shadows...

panic

Re: Rev2 breakup
« Reply #31 on: January 16, 2019, 03:03:50 AM »
no independent OSC levels,...

Small off topic question: in the manual I see "osc 1 level" as a modulation destination (contrary to the P08 and its descendants), can't you use that one as a workaround to give you independant osc levels?

On topic: if all goes well, this year, I will probably add one mono and one poly to my (very small) synth collection. And although I love my mopho-tetra, and I would certainly appreciate it with a higher voice count, I have serious doubts about upgrading to rev2. It is a very capable synth, but as stated here before, it has a very specific sound, and although you can program around some of that, doing this takes up time I do not always have. It would be very nice to have something were I can dial up my basic patch, and think "this sounds great, 5 minutes of tweaking and I'm there". Still, the combination of 5-oct keyboard, 16-voice, bitimbral, modulation capabilities and the price tag always put it back on the list...

Razmo

  • ***
  • 2168
  • I am shadow...
    • Kaleidoscopic Artworks
Re: Rev2 breakup
« Reply #32 on: January 16, 2019, 03:11:29 AM »
no independent OSC levels,...

Small off topic question: in the manual I see "osc 1 level" as a modulation destination (contrary to the P08 and its descendants), can't you use that one as a workaround to give you independant osc levels?

On topic: if all goes well, this year, I will probably add one mono and one poly to my (very small) synth collection. And although I love my mopho-tetra, and I would certainly appreciate it with a higher voice count, I have serious doubts about upgrading to rev2. It is a very capable synth, but as stated here before, it has a very specific sound, and although you can program around some of that, doing this takes up time I do not always have. It would be very nice to have something were I can dial up my basic patch, and think "this sounds great, 5 minutes of tweaking and I'm there". Still, the combination of 5-oct keyboard, 16-voice, bitimbral, modulation capabilities and the price tag always put it back on the list...

Yes you could... but that particular part in the manual is an error... it's not available as a modulation destination unfortunately :)

The reason is the way the Curtis chip is made... if you look at it's datasheet, you will see that it has a CV input that is named "OSC Balance"... it's hardwired like that inside the chip... there is no way to have independant control of the oscillator levels....

You can simulate it though for one of theoscillators, by switching the other to "off", and then use the OSC Mix parameter as a volume control, but that really do not make much sense as you could always do the leveling in the Amp section instead then... there is a bit of difference to it though; it's pre filter volume control if you did this... but still... what would the use be...

and about your upgrade; then do not get a REV2... get something like a P6 or OB6 instead maybe, it's more "instant gratification" ... REV2 is a deep synth, and you need to spend time with it... when I do a program from scratch, i usually sit with a program for between one to three hours... now I'm a perfectionist though, and are not creating the more straight forward synth programs, so it could probably be done faster on a REV2... but you have to work longer to obtain what you want with the REV2

In many cases i think the problem is that those who want this "instant gratification" want it because they want the REV2 to sound like a vintage synthesizer... they want it to play another character than it inherits ... that WILL require you to spend more time on the sound... if people simply tried to FORGET about making it sound like something else, and started to just make sounds that fall natural to the REV2, then maybe that is the difference between those who like the REV2, and those who do not... I have NO intention of my REV2 to sound like a MOOG or a VINTAGE synth... I just use the options at hand, and tweak until i get a sound that is not something I've heard on another synth, but something I just like... I'm not comparing this sound to another instrument because then I will constantly feel irritated it does not sound it... you could reverse the comparison could you not? ... I do a program sound that i really much like on the REV2, and then try to make another ynth sound like it, constantly being irritated it will NOT sound like my REV2... just a thought :)

Sure... some people just do not cope with certain types of character in a synth... I bet there are people who do not like MOOGs character as well (I recall Jarre said he much prefered the sound of the ARP filter for example)... people have different taste in synth character, and that is fine with me :) ... i like them all, and want them all to have as much variety as possible... others want only a certain small amount that fit their taste...
« Last Edit: January 16, 2019, 03:20:31 AM by Razmo »
If you need me, follow the shadows...

Re: Rev2 breakup
« Reply #33 on: January 16, 2019, 06:09:56 AM »
To Razmo who wrote: I do not believe that there is a bug-free synthesizer out there...

The Ensoniq SQ-80, which offers a pretty sophisticated software, is 100% bug free. The Korg DW8000, which is not as powerful, also has a bug free software. And probably many other synths from that era.

Mostly because back in those days, programmers had no choice to do their job right the first time before commiting to mask ROM.

And its pretty ironic that the REV2 would have MIDI bugs, from the company of the founder of MIDI...

Yes... but these old synths are also a lot less complex softwarewise... you have to consider that todays synths are VERY deep, and the more complicated and deep, the greater the chance for bugs... and also the time needed to test the synth... even if Dave is the inventor of MIDI, he cannot be perfect... he'll make bugs as everyone else does.

Sure they can test it more, and eliminate more bugs... but to cover ALL combinations of uses of such an imense and deep unit is just impossible... personaly I'm ok with that... as long as they do swift fixes, and fix ALL the bugs they know of... i can't stand their "Low Visibility Bug" comments people are given... the way they chose between the bugs to fix on Tempest made me seriously angry really... they left in some serious MIDI DIN bugs on Tempest that they knew very well about, but decided not to fix them... also minor screen bugs got neglected... I think that's a shame... such fine synths and drummachine, and then they do not polish their gems... but I feel they have gotten better at fixing bugs lately... it's been a while since I've seen such coments as "low visibility bug" or "expected behavior" as answers to problems they do not want to fix.

I agree that more complexity makes for a harder process to create correct software. However, a lot of the basic functions of MIDI have not really changed over the years. These basic functions should be well understood by every synth manufacturer and be implemented without any problems. MIDI is one of the few widely used protocols out there still on version 1.0 (although there have been enhancements, of course).

The complexity kicks in with things like our Rev2 Layer B. Is a Rev 2 two synthesizers in one physical package? If so, what is a stacked program exactly? I can imagine this has lead to some of the issues some people currently have with the Rev2.

As for testing: yes, a full test is always best. It is also expensive and time consuming. Covering all possible combinations is next to impossible, given the sheer amount of settings. This can be mitigated by carving up the entire implementation in independent units that can be tested separately. A single unit can be tested well, and if the interaction between the software units is well understood, a full system can be relatively bug free.
DSI Prophet Rev2 16 voice, Arturia Drumbrute Impact, Tascam DP-008 EX

Razmo

  • ***
  • 2168
  • I am shadow...
    • Kaleidoscopic Artworks
Re: Rev2 breakup
« Reply #34 on: January 16, 2019, 06:19:55 AM »
To Razmo who wrote: I do not believe that there is a bug-free synthesizer out there...

The Ensoniq SQ-80, which offers a pretty sophisticated software, is 100% bug free. The Korg DW8000, which is not as powerful, also has a bug free software. And probably many other synths from that era.

Mostly because back in those days, programmers had no choice to do their job right the first time before commiting to mask ROM.

And its pretty ironic that the REV2 would have MIDI bugs, from the company of the founder of MIDI...

Yes... but these old synths are also a lot less complex softwarewise... you have to consider that todays synths are VERY deep, and the more complicated and deep, the greater the chance for bugs... and also the time needed to test the synth... even if Dave is the inventor of MIDI, he cannot be perfect... he'll make bugs as everyone else does.

Sure they can test it more, and eliminate more bugs... but to cover ALL combinations of uses of such an imense and deep unit is just impossible... personaly I'm ok with that... as long as they do swift fixes, and fix ALL the bugs they know of... i can't stand their "Low Visibility Bug" comments people are given... the way they chose between the bugs to fix on Tempest made me seriously angry really... they left in some serious MIDI DIN bugs on Tempest that they knew very well about, but decided not to fix them... also minor screen bugs got neglected... I think that's a shame... such fine synths and drummachine, and then they do not polish their gems... but I feel they have gotten better at fixing bugs lately... it's been a while since I've seen such coments as "low visibility bug" or "expected behavior" as answers to problems they do not want to fix.

I agree that more complexity makes for a harder process to create correct software. However, a lot of the basic functions of MIDI have not really changed over the years. These basic functions should be well understood by every synth manufacturer and be implemented without any problems. MIDI is one of the few widely used protocols out there still on version 1.0 (although there have been enhancements, of course).

The complexity kicks in with things like our Rev2 Layer B. Is a Rev 2 two synthesizers in one physical package? If so, what is a stacked program exactly? I can imagine this has lead to some of the issues some people currently have with the Rev2.

As for testing: yes, a full test is always best. It is also expensive and time consuming. Covering all possible combinations is next to impossible, given the sheer amount of settings. This can be mitigated by carving up the entire implementation in independent units that can be tested separately. A single unit can be tested well, and if the interaction between the software units is well understood, a full system can be relatively bug free.

Yes... it is essentially two hardwired synths in one box, which is probably why it complicates matter... I personaly feel that there should never had been a Multi Mode on these dual-timbral synths that Dave keep on designing... the way that you handle multimode is in a compromising fashion that may very well lead to bugs... a program is essentially "two programs" bundled up in one program, so as soon as you start to use it in multimode, things become compromised... just browsing separate single layers is fiddly... i personally never use my synths in this Multimode because of this.

I have also contacted support on numerous times about bugs that seem to be related to layer B... I do not know why they have so many problems with the B layer, since it's basically identical to Layer A which seem to work fine... but I believe it has to do with the fact that without stack/split mode on, it is layer A that basically govern anything with both synths... without layer B on, it's voices is generally added as a "slave module" to layer A for achieving the illusion of more polyphony... I bet some of the problem is related to bugs with switching between these two modes of operation. But it's guesswork of course...
If you need me, follow the shadows...

maxter

  • ***
  • 354
Re: Rev2 breakup
« Reply #35 on: January 16, 2019, 06:52:49 AM »
I must say the Rev2 generally seems a little "rushed", for whatever reason. But I suppose the price in a way makes up for it. I mean, if it had been more thoroughly tested and developed for x amount of man-hours, that would of course have affected the price. As someone said you get what you pay for, and so I do have that in mind, but I still think this is THE prophet for me. I loved the Prophet '08 but in some ways I felt a bit limited. The Rev2 addressed just about all of those limitations and added an FX engine, and somehow managed to produce all this at a lower cost than the P'08 originally was.

I'm just eager, more than anything, and/or lacking "patience for it to mature". I'm not sure. It's a different relationship compared to other synths I've fallen in love with, where you soon knew what you got. You knew the limitations and the possibilities, and could love it for what it is. That's why I'm kind of "on hold" to get fully into the Rev2. Will I get as excited when the "final" OS drops, as I would've got if it had been onboard when I first bought it? Will I be able to trust it then? I appreciate CSI updating it, but are there mixed signals coming through? Will they put the effort needed in to make it realize its full potential?
The Way the Truth and the Life

maxter

  • ***
  • 354
Re: Rev2 breakup
« Reply #36 on: January 16, 2019, 07:10:39 AM »
OT concerning Behringers adventures, with all the moral concerns aside... What's interesting for me is their original products, like Deepmind and Neutron, although they're not my "type", they're still building off of a concept rather than just copying. And they seem to have hit their own spot that no other synths currently occupy.

The copies are what they are, though with some added functionality, and it's hard to complain about a Model D being 300 or an Odyssey 400 (with apparently even a metal chassis). The "bad quality" rep will be hard to get rid of, but they really seem to have been on top of it in the productions of the last few years. Today, I actually wouldn't think twice about a new Behringer product quality.

But back to the point, what is interesting to me is what their original productions will be like in a couple of years... When they've copied all the classics, learned a LOT from it, and can implement whatever they want from wherever into whatever concept of their liking. They seem to have made good choices on what features to add to the classics for starters, without making it something else, so this does seem very promising to me. I'd rather sport one of their own creations, rather than a copy. Especially if it's beyond the copies and still cheap.
The Way the Truth and the Life

Sleep of Reason

Re: Rev2 breakup
« Reply #37 on: January 16, 2019, 06:07:38 PM »
I was watching a video review of the new Minilogue XD and they happened to bring up the DeepMind. It seems that others find the build quality to be chintzy as well. The DM12 I tried had a big gap between B and middle C. The overall build made perfect sense why it's priced the way it is. The sound from what I remember was decent, but nothing to write home about. Again, I find it less egregious than the other clones as at least some effort was put into making it its own thing. As for the UB-Xa, it's hard to imagine them bringing it in at a price to appease the masses as well as having a high build quality.

As for synths released around the time of the REV2, the Peak is actually the one that has turned me around the most. The recent update is a prime example of how to maintain a product post-launch. Kudos to Novation.



Re: Rev2 breakup
« Reply #38 on: January 16, 2019, 07:48:15 PM »
There's not a single complex synth running on software that people aren't complaining about online because of limitations or issues. Check the Arturia forum for complaints about Matrixbrute bugs, check Elektronauts for complaints about Overbridge, check Moog forums for complaints about Moog One MIDI issues, etc. Something like a OB6 likely has fewer issues but is also much simpler. If I wanted a simple synth to play huge thick chords on I'd go for an OB6. But few analog synths can touch the Rev2's modulation capabilities. Hell, most digital ones don't. And that's what draws me to it. And I like the way it leaves room for thicker-sounding instruments in the mix.


Re: Rev2 breakup
« Reply #39 on: January 16, 2019, 11:40:16 PM »
I miss the good old days when you bought a polysynth and it was working as expected right from the start.
Minimoog D (vintage), OB6 (Desktop), Oberheim Matrix-6 (MIDI Controller), Prophet REV2-16, DeepMind 12, VC340