Rev2 breakup

roberth909 · « **on:** January 05, 2019, 06:04:15 PM »

You know, I tried to like you, I even tried to love you, I guess, but it just isn’t working out. I feel like we need to go our separate ways. It’s not you, it’s me. No, actually it is you. You are too cold, artificial, cheap, plastic, I need someone with more warmth, heart, and emotion. I’m considering your cousin Prophet 6, I think he might have more of what I need. So I hope you find someone who cares for you, I tried, I really did, I just couldn’t make it work out. $:-\$

AlainHubert · « **Reply #1 on:** January 05, 2019, 08:35:38 PM »

I sympathise with you. My REV2 is on borrowed time too. As soon as something better comes along (the P6 with only 6 voices ain't enough for me), I'll be getting a divorce also... ;-)

It might very well be Behringer's upcoming UB-Xa.

Good luck with your Prophet 6.

psionic11 · « **Reply #2 on:** January 12, 2019, 12:25:15 PM »

I tried too, I really did, but after the honeymoon phase I found out she isn't what I need in this relationship.

All I wanted was an analog bi-timbral controller with aftertouch to play well with my Kronos live.

She looked good from a distance, specs and all, but she just doesn't play well with others. Her MIDI etiquette is off, her filters too honky in a group, and bugs me constantly with little surprises that suck hours away troubleshooting.

Baby, you gots to go!

maxter · « **Reply #3 on:** January 13, 2019, 01:58:10 PM »

I'm on the fence on this one... I'll give it a little more time, maybe a couple more OS updates to see if the quirks get fixed, but I'm leaning over the fence towards parting ways right now. Trust is very important in a relationship.

psionic11 · « **Reply #4 on:** January 13, 2019, 07:21:26 PM »

Quote from: AlainHubert on January 05, 2019, 08:35:38 PM

It might very well be Behringer's upcoming UB-Xa.

The UB-Xa is definitely on my watch list, but it could be mid 2020 yet before it actually drops.

Questions for you regarding your Matrix 6 keyboard:
- How does it allocate the voices for the split? Can you have 2 voices for the left and 4 for the right?
- Can the left be on channel 2 and the right on channel 3?
- When you call up a bi-timbral patch, can the keyboard itself be on (global) channel 1 to receive the program change commands, but the actual timbres be on channel 2 and 3 as in the above example? Thx.

AlainHubert · « **Reply #5 on:** January 13, 2019, 08:19:16 PM »

Since I use my Oberheim Matrix-6 solely as a MIDI keyboard controller for my OB6 Module (in order to get a 5 octaves keyboard), I wouldn't know about that. And since I don't have the user manual handy, I don't remember how the split mode works. Sorry.
All I remember is that it's a real pain in the ass to program, even to simply change a single parameter on it ! I really, really hate it. That's why it's relegated to serve only as a MIDI controller.

maxter · « **Reply #6 on:** January 14, 2019, 04:20:07 AM »

Quote from: AlainHubert on January 13, 2019, 08:19:16 PM

Since I use my Oberheim Matrix-6 solely as a MIDI keyboard controller for my OB6 Module (in order to get a 5 octaves keyboard), I wouldn't know about that. And since I don't have the user manual handy, I don't remember how the split mode works. Sorry.
All I remember is that it's a real pain in the ass to program, even to simply change a single parameter on it ! I really, really hate it. That's why it's relegated to serve only as a MIDI controller.

If you've got an iPad, there's a controller template for the Matrix1000 for TBMS, which should work with Matrix6 as well. Apparently the matrix routing doesn't work with M6, but other than that it should work. I used this back when I had the Matrix1000, which made it into an actual programmable synth instead of just a preset-machine.
http://www.thiburce.com/TBStuff/forums/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=278&p=1075&hilit=matrix1000&sid=bbf3f124e1d4b7418885ddd944b23159#p1075

philroyjenkins · « **Reply #7 on:** January 14, 2019, 01:03:29 PM »

Quote from: roberth909 on January 05, 2019, 06:04:15 PM

I tried, I really did, I just couldn’t make it work out. $:-\$

I hear ya man, I really do. I think the Rev2 has its own sound which isn't nearly as vintage as something like a Prophet 6. If your looking for the instant warm and fuzzies a p6 should get you there without trouble.

I happen to love the Rev2 and P08 sound as its own thing. It can be cold, chalky, shrill or any number of other terms people use to describe it but one thing I will say is that its pretty true to its sound in demos. This sound is what drew me to it in the first place as it just had something in the mids that I loved in every example I heard. It takes a deeper amount of fine tuning and sculpting to get to its sweet spots while the p6 which should churn out greatness with ease.

There are other fish in the sea ma dude, sucks you gave it a shot but had to come to this realization in the end but its for the best.

I just feel like sharing my appreciation for what rev2/p08 specifically have to offer sound wise.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46FWEOEGHMo&

- This entire album. Mmm. I'm sure Mark could slay on a p6 but I wouldn't change a thing in the sound design of any of these tracks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbWrEL07vUI

- Another exceptional example of what I consider the "Modern" prophet sound. I think that modern prophet character is what makes this track with its almost sterile and steady detuning. Its not an organic VCO drift, but something unique to itself.

And I have just another example of some random patching I was doing showing an almost hollow digital side that can be coaxed from the Rev2 that I don't think gets showcased all that much. - https://clyp.it/sjnxrglh - just random patching and playing like I said, but hopefully it shows some potential for an area of sound design to explore that isn't immediately obvious.

Montyrivers · « **Reply #8 on:** January 14, 2019, 10:13:22 PM »

I was in it for the envelopes.

YOU KNEW WHAT THIS WAS.

Nah but seriously, the drop off on the 4 pole filter cutoff and resonance and the lack of beefy low end or a per voice gain boost makes this a tricky synth for some folks to gel with.

psionic11 · « **Reply #9 on:** January 15, 2019, 05:13:01 AM »

Quote from: Montyrivers on January 14, 2019, 10:13:22 PM

Nah but seriously, the drop off on the 4 pole filter cutoff and resonance and the lack of beefy low end or a per voice gain boost makes this a tricky synth for some folks to gel with.

This! And I'm not a fan of the attack and decay curves either.

You can at least steer away from the Curtis character by using 2 pole mode, FX distortion set high with low tone, slight filter FM, and using waveshaping with osc mix set fully to OSC1. A bass sound will get its own split and be in unison, but there goes any 80s left hand action for octaves.

Ironically for a DSI instrument, the lackluster MIDI implementation was the straw that broke the camel's back.

Djinn · « **Reply #10 on:** January 15, 2019, 05:49:48 AM »

I'm by no means an expert with the rev2 but I know u can effect the envelope from linear to exponential with modulation settings and the 3rd envelope
I personally think the rev 2 has a lot going for it and its a synth with a lot of bang for the bucks you just have to dig in with ur patch creation tricks
Saying that I would like certain items added with a new os
For instance slew rate for lfos etc check feature requests

maxter · « **Reply #11 on:** January 15, 2019, 05:50:53 AM »

Yep, the midi implementation is the deal breaker for me too. Kept thinking "it'll be just fine once they fix it". I didn't think it would take very long, but now I wonder if it'll ever get there. It's a shame for a synth with so much potential to be handicapped by poor MIDI implementation. Sorry to sound like a broken record here, but I will keep whining about this.

Djinn · « **Reply #12 on:** January 15, 2019, 05:57:05 AM »

What is it about the midi implementation that's bothering you? Just so I know I haven't ran into that problem yet

Razmo · « **Reply #13 on:** January 15, 2019, 08:11:02 AM »

The envelope curves you can rather easily change to have other curves (exponential upward/downward)... just route an envelope to it's own decay parameter... positive modulation like this makes the curve more snappy, negative modulation makes it the other way around.

One reason you do not get "beefy" may be because the VCA envelope lowers the output too much... the REV2 is more than capable of doing beefy and loud basses (unless of course you measure all bass to the character of a MOOG)... I often use negative modulation feedback to the VCA envelope because this allow for more of the transient in the bass sound, and also the body of it, to keep it's volume high... in short, the feedback makes the volume stay high longer, and then gradually but quicker and quicker fall down to zero... it actually works pretty nice.

It's true that you have to work a little more to get at some timbres, in contrast to an OB6 or P6 or the like... if one want quick and instant gratification then the P6 and OB6 is probably the better buy... but if you want the flexibility and depth of the REV2, you just have to accept that you will need to learn how to tweak your synth to get those sounds.

I'm sure everyone can agree, that the Curtis chips are a bit limited... no doubt... everything is "on chip" making little possibility to put something "in between" in it's signal path... thus; no independent OSC levels, no pre filter drive etc. etc... but instead you get a much cheaper synth because it's not as costly to manufacture.

During my soundbank creation process over the last 7 months, I certainly bumped into it's disadvantages, it's shortcomings etc... even it's "character" began to bore me a bit because i can hear it in every patch I did... but that's how it is with all synths... they have a certain character, and that's just the way it is... if I had been working on a MOOG ONE for seven months, I'm sure I would have felt the same way too.

REV2 is by no means a bad synth... it has just as many advantages as non-advantages as any other synth out there... just because it's more "thin" does not make it bad... it actually make it suit other purposes better... it may blend well with other more bass heavy machines for example. In my opinion, the REV2 is very well suited to making sound FX, pads and bell sounds, all which do not start to alias in the highs as many digital synths often do.. I'd probably turn to something else for stuff like basses when it needs to get REALLY low and vintage sounding.

If you only wanted ONE synth, i can understand why you would look at something else... but if you collect several synthesizers, and want machines that compliment each other, then I think REV2 is a fantastic bet at a 16 voice analog DCO synth with a hell of a lot of deep features you will not find in anything else... and if you cannot get a nice sound out of it, it's either because you specifically do not like the REV2 character, or because you might want to dig deeper with the synthesis engine and learn it's secrets... and if that takes too long time... get a P6 instead

psionic11 · « **Reply #14 on:** January 15, 2019, 10:01:28 AM »

The Rev2 is great on features, and it's core sound can compliment a synth arsenal for those who collect synths. I'm not a collector, and am in the process of streamlining my rig.

However, I'm a gigging musician, not so much into recording. I got a Rev2 for more keyboard real estate for my main driver which is a Kronos. The 2nd tier keyboard needs to have a beefiness and color to make up for the Kronos virtual analog engines, which are no slackers. The 2nd tier also needs to be a 61 key controller for 2 MIDI channels, preferably with aftertouch, and respond to program changes for each song. This rules out any other Sequential board except perhaps the X, which I entertained upgrading to until experiencing underwhelming MIDI capabilities on the Rev2.

It's a shame, really, because I really want to use it live, but it only fills 75% of my needs. I've got a Mio4 on the way as a hopeful workaround for the MIDI issues, but I'll probably have to downgrade to a previous firmware version, because I can't have layer B muted upon receiving an external program change command.

Too bad the Moog One is too big to gig regularly, but it's not fully implemented in the MIDI department either.

I'm hoping the UB-Xa will check all the boxes and be my #2 for my Kronos.

AlainHubert · « **Reply #15 on:** January 15, 2019, 10:14:28 AM »

I agree with you Razmo that the REV2 is certainly not a bad synth. Far from it. It's just a synth with the later-Curtis-chips overcast, as you wrote.

To be truthful, if my Behringer DeepMind 12 would have been a real 2 oscillators per voice synth with 12 voices available, I would probably never have bought a REV2. Because the DM12 offers pretty much everything that I'm looking for in a polysynth, including such things as programmable envelopes curves without having to sacrifice a mod slot in the mod matrix, and a unified LFO mode, as well as an independent per voice mode like on the REV2. And it does sound really great.

(yeah I know I can get 2 osc per voice on a DM12, but it cuts the polyphony in half, making it a 6 voice synth. I already got a superb 6 voice synth: the OB6).

The announced Behringer UB-Xa (OB-Xa clone) should be around in late 2019 (the main PCB design is already done). So Sequential should already be working on something to counter that, because if it's as good as the DM12 sound wise, it should sell like hotcakes.

Razmo · « **Reply #16 on:** January 15, 2019, 10:27:27 AM »

Quote from: psionic11 on January 15, 2019, 10:01:28 AM

The Rev2 is great on features, and it's core sound can compliment a synth arsenal for those who collect synths. I'm not a collector, and am in the process of streamlining my rig.

However, I'm a gigging musician, not so much into recording. I got a Rev2 for more keyboard real estate for my main driver which is a Kronos. The 2nd tier keyboard needs to have a beefiness and color to make up for the Kronos virtual analog engines, which are no slackers. The 2nd tier also needs to be a 61 key controller for 2 MIDI channels, preferably with aftertouch, and respond to program changes for each song. This rules out any other Sequential board except perhaps the X, which I entertained upgrading to until experiencing underwhelming MIDI capabilities on the Rev2.

It's a shame, really, because I really want to use it live, but it only fills 75% of my needs. I've got a Mio4 on the way as a hopeful workaround for the MIDI issues, but I'll probably have to downgrade to a previous firmware version, because I can't have layer B muted upon receiving an external program change command.

Too bad the Moog One is too big to gig regularly, but it's not fully implemented in the MIDI department either.

I'm hoping the UB-Xa will check all the boxes and be my #2 for my Kronos.

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...

maxter · « **Reply #17 on:** January 15, 2019, 11:24:48 AM »

Quote from: Djinn on January 15, 2019, 05:57:05 AM

What is it about the midi implementation that's bothering you? Just so I know I haven't ran into that problem yet

Mostly just the occurring bugs etc, and with each new OS where one is fixed, another is introduced. I'm exaggerating, but I suppose I've got tired of updating to a new OS, just to run into a newer bug I can't live with, downgrading back, trying the next OS, downgrading back... One update (1.1.4.4?) caused every NRPN to be off by a 100-something parameter numbers, never quite understood it, but I was not able to edit it with my iPad then. 1.1.4.5 sorted that one at least, so I'm staying on that until the rest gets fixed or I part with it.

I'll probably have to mention limited parameter control range as well, not a huge drawback except for when it comes to the FILTER, which really should've been 14-bit, imo. I just don't understand why not? If someone would like to automate the filter directly, of live tweaking via midi controller, and have really smooth, minute changes, it would be useful. Or if you'd like to record the midi of your performance in the studio, with live tweaks of the filter parameter, then it wouldn't be as smooth on playback as it was when you recorded it, as it apparently has a higher internal bitrate than the midi. Of course there is the alternate path going via the mod matrix, but then you're limited in range, not being able to control the whole range of the filter, if you want it real smooth. And you'd have the extra hassle of the setup, occupying a mod slot and having to use an external midi controller or something else to sweep the filter. Why not just add a second parameter number for the other 7 bits, or why not 14-bit to begin with? The filter is just so important. I only know one possible drawback with this, that Razmo would mention if I don't

and that is patch saving. It wouldn't save/recall the full 14 bits of the parameter value, but that really doesn't matter to me. And there could be a switch, disable 14-bit, for those who absolutely wouldn't want greater, smoother midi control of the filter.

So you're limited to setting up something which is not as "hands-on", and is more limited in use, and requires external equipment. Than if the filter was just 14-bit midi compatible, and you could record the live tweaks and then play it back with the same result as when you played it.

Djinn · « **Reply #18 on:** January 15, 2019, 11:48:50 AM »

Yes maxter your comments are fair enuff I 2would love 14bit control of the filter

Razmo · « **Reply #19 on:** January 15, 2019, 12:16:12 PM »

Regarding bugs... at least Sequential is listening in on the reports. I do not think there are any bug free software in any synthesizer, and those that are found should of course be fixed. This i where Sequential sometimes lack proper dedication in my opinion, especially when a device is reaching it's end of development... that is why it's crucial, that if you find any bugs, write about them to support, and notice if they are put on the bug list... if they do, they usually fix them...

Personally I feel that by each new beta, the REV2 gets a little bit more stable... yes, a bug or two (new) creeps in sometimes, but if people write support about them, they usually fix them in the next OS... you need to have patience enough to let a product mature, and if you find any bugs, REPORT THEM! ... otherwise they might just slip over into the final OS at some point.

Therefore I cannot stress enough: WRITE SUPPORT!!! ... writing in the forum is not enough, and DSI has said it countless of times.... it's cool that it's written in here so that others can check to see if they also can reproduce the bug, and also because it makes Sequential more aware the more people report the same bug.

When it starts to get annoying is when Sequential start their "less visibility bug" statements and "Expected behavior"... these things usually happen in the end times of OS development (at least that is my experience)... so bombard them with bug reports while the product is still young, if you want it to mature to be bug-free (as much as possible... there will always be bugs... my problem is when they KNOW of bugs, but do not fix them).

Sound character and design issues cannot be fixed, but software issues can... and should be fixed.

Regarding REV2 on this matter I must say that I have not run into anything critical yet (and I've written an editor for it, so I've been thru most of the MIDI specs)... MIDI seems to work fine for what I use it for, and I am normaly rather demanding when it comes to the MIDI protocol...