Rev2 breakup

[jg666]

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.

You've basically summed up what I was going to say

Yes it's annoying to go through the process of installing the latest OS only to find it's caused another problem but that's the way software is these days. I've worked as a software developer for 30 or so years now and the software I work on suffers just the same because everything is so much more complex now than it was 30 years ago. It's the same with synths in my opinion.

We are all probably a bit guilty of looking back to the good old days of the classic vintage synths through rose tinted glasses and we tend to just remember the good experiences and any problems or faults with these old machines are now seen as 'character' by a lot of people 

[Tugdual]

I feel a bit sad to see people leaving this machine but I guess you have expectations that are not fulfilled by the rev2. While there are definitely issues with the REV2 I still like its sound and there is no match for modulation capabilities on the market. Now a nylon guitare doesn’t have the same sound and usage as a folk guitare. Metal and nylon sound very different which doesn’t mean one is better than the other. The REV2 has its sound and is a nice instrument with a lot of features. Having tried the Novation peak I can swear the rev sounds analog, may be the modern way as some said. For example the peak which relies on digital oscillators (and analog filter) had some noise (?!) while the rev has none. This I think qualifies one aspect of what modern analog is. Of course you may still play the rev with a guitar amplifier and a spring reverb and record with a mic if you think it is more authentic this way 
This being said there are a lot of issues which hopefully will be fixed and may be sometime we can even use it remotely on Ableton which is very hard at the moment. Sometime I wish the rev firmware became opensource...

[Darrolav]

I'm pretty satisfied with my Prophet Rev2, sometimes I just initialize a patch and play it like this without touching anything but his keyboard... Love his sound

[maxter]

I'll apologize for being harsh on the Rev2 (again). I know my criticisms may come across as hard, but they're honest without any sugar coating. I'll take any synth with its quirks for what it is, I've just become a bit restless with it I suppose. I know I'm picky, I just don't want to dive in too deep and start relying on it too much yet, in case of something unexpected suddenly clogging the wheels, so to speak. Not that I think it would, but there's this uncertainty. But more than anything I'm "afraid" (for lack of a better word) it won't reach its true (not full) potential in the end. I really hope it does, because it is THE analog polysynth for me. There's not even a competitor to it in my case and opinion.

Actually I haven't had the Layer B bank problem yet. I had problems early on with sysex transfers and updating OS, but I soon tried an older computer with an older cheap midi interface (really slow). It may be good to have an old computer around for this purpose, in case one should acquire an older synth/sampler, as I've noted that they can't handle the speed of midi sysex transfers on newer computers and/or interfaces. Some even require sending "junk midi" between each sysex msg.

[timboréale]

But more than anything I'm "afraid" (for lack of a better word) it won't reach its true (not full) potential in the end. I really hope it does, because it is THE analog polysynth for me. There's not even a competitor to it in my case and opinion.

DSI has a habit (c.f. Tempest) of not doing this consistently. I have a strong feeling the Rev2 will get the same sort of attention. Maybe if there's a resurgence in popularity they'll give it a v.2 like they did with the Tempest, fix a bunch of problems, add a few features, leave many ancient bugs untouched to the frustration of many, and then call it a day, but still sell it.

It may be good to have an old computer around for this purpose, in case one should acquire an older synth/sampler, as I've noted that they can't handle the speed of midi sysex transfers on newer computers and/or interfaces.

On the mac, Sysex Librarian and Elektron C6 both allow you to adjust the send speed of SysEx over USB to remote devices. Both of these work a treat on older gear and fussy systems like the Rev2, no need to keep an older system around. I keep the SysEx speed to my Rev2 over USB at 50% and have zero problems with reliability in this fashion, so long as nothing is trying to send clock, midi, or bank changes on the same interface while I'm doing the transfer.

[jg666]

I'll apologize for being harsh on the Rev2 (again). I know my criticisms may come across as hard, but they're honest without any sugar coating. I'll take any synth with its quirks for what it is, I've just become a bit restless with it I suppose. I know I'm picky, I just don't want to dive in too deep and start relying on it too much yet, in case of something unexpected suddenly clogging the wheels, so to speak. Not that I think it would, but there's this uncertainty. But more than anything I'm "afraid" (for lack of a better word) it won't reach its true (not full) potential in the end. I really hope it does, because it is THE analog polysynth for me. There's not even a competitor to it in my case and opinion.

Actually I haven't had the Layer B bank problem yet. I had problems early on with sysex transfers and updating OS, but I soon tried an older computer with an older cheap midi interface (really slow). It may be good to have an old computer around for this purpose, in case one should acquire an older synth/sampler, as I've noted that they can't handle the speed of midi sysex transfers on newer computers and/or interfaces. Some even require sending "junk midi" between each sysex msg.

There's no need to apologise for expressing opinions It's only natural to have strong feelings when we buy something that we really want to be great and certain things spoil the experience for you.

[musicmaker]

For posting bugs on this forum there is little change you get attention or resolved. WRITE TO SUPPORT. Over time post on the forum gets so scrambled by off topic comments that the the key point gets lost. It's much more effective to track by a support ticket.  All the bugs I reported were fixed. (sooner or very later). Many of those were very easy to find, some harder. Some major, some minor issue. If more users could try to reproduce an issue and confirm that would certainly help to make a case.

What I really would wish for was a list from Sequential that shows open bugs + feature requests and their status, confirmed, analyzing, will be fixed, will not be fixed, won't be implemented, cannot fix etc... A shared google drive excel file would certainly do and put in link in a sticky. But like other companies bug-list are not y public. Every product has bugs. Intel processor have thousands of issues even used in production. The MIDI implementation in the manual is absolutely not reflecting the actual implementation and that has been getting worse from model to model in the past years.

Please write to support for any issue before the REV2 goes out of focus for fixing bugs, hopefully, there is still time...
You definitely will feel better about being heard.

P.S: What 8/16 voice poly with such excellent keyboard (though I own a module, due to space limits, but may buy the keys sometime)  can you get for a similar price ? A copy of 70/80's analog circuits without any improvements for stability, quality and features, no patch storage, no open Sysex midi implementation/patch send/receive, no full CC/NRPN, no open MIDI implementation, not multi-timbral ?

P.S: Interested in knowing what MIDI bugs  you are experiencing ?

[OakBloodThree]

As a relatively-new Rev2 owner, I find this thread really interesting as it saves me the time of encountering the instrument's shortcomings in real-time.  Seeing workarounds for some of them is also helpful (e.g. Razmo's tip on envelope self-modulation).

So far, the thread hasn't made me regret the purchase.  I bought it based on the features list and the sounds I heard in YouTube demonstrations.  Those were all true to what comes out if it IRL.

FWIW, I will be using it exclusively in recording (though probably not often with MIDI beyond beat clock to get the Arpeggiator synched), and hardly ever in combination with other synths.  The only only other hardware synths we own are a D-50 and a Monotron.

Patch editing on the Rev2 is definitely fussier than I had hoped, but still way easier than the D-50 ever was.

I think it helps for me that  since music is a sideline at this point in my life, I'm happy starting with a sound and building a composition around it, where working musicians more often need to be more goal-oriented.

As I'm now 49, for the sake of my eyes I do wish the LCD display were bigger (like the one on the D-50 which I bought when I was 22).

[jg666]

As a relatively-new Rev2 owner, I find this thread really interesting as it saves me the time of encountering the instrument's shortcomings in real-time.  Seeing workarounds for some of them is also helpful (e.g. Razmo's tip on envelope self-modulation).

So far, the thread hasn't made me regret the purchase.  I bought it based on the features list and the sounds I heard in YouTube demonstrations.  Those were all true to what comes out if it IRL.

FWIW, I will be using it exclusively in recording (though probably not often with MIDI beyond beat clock to get the Arpeggiator synched), and hardly ever in combination with other synths.  The only only other hardware synths we own are a D-50 and a Monotron.

Patch editing on the Rev2 is definitely fussier than I had hoped, but still way easier than the D-50 ever was.

I think it helps for me that  since music is a sideline at this point in my life, I'm happy starting with a sound and building a composition around it, where working musicians more often need to be more goal-oriented.

As I'm now 49, for the sake of my eyes I do wish the LCD display were bigger (like the one on the D-50 which I bought when I was 22).

I'm 57 and totally agree about the screen - I'd like one the same size as the one on my MOXF but I know that won't happen 

[jg666]

As a relatively-new Rev2 owner, I find this thread really interesting as it saves me the time of encountering the instrument's shortcomings in real-time.  Seeing workarounds for some of them is also helpful (e.g. Razmo's tip on envelope self-modulation).

So far, the thread hasn't made me regret the purchase.  I bought it based on the features list and the sounds I heard in YouTube demonstrations.  Those were all true to what comes out if it IRL.

FWIW, I will be using it exclusively in recording (though probably not often with MIDI beyond beat clock to get the Arpeggiator synched), and hardly ever in combination with other synths.  The only only other hardware synths we own are a D-50 and a Monotron.

Patch editing on the Rev2 is definitely fussier than I had hoped, but still way easier than the D-50 ever was.

I think it helps for me that  since music is a sideline at this point in my life, I'm happy starting with a sound and building a composition around it, where working musicians more often need to be more goal-oriented.

As I'm now 49, for the sake of my eyes I do wish the LCD display were bigger (like the one on the D-50 which I bought when I was 22).

I'm 57 and totally agree about the screen - I'd like one the same size as the one on my MOXF but I know that won't happen 

I meant to say MODX and not MOXF

[osflaa]

I really like the Rev2, very versatile and fullfeatured, yet easy to use. But there have been a bit more bug issues that I hoped for. Actually, I went from VSTs to hardware synths partly because I believed bugs barely existed in hardware synths. But I believe most issues are sorted out now.

I recently bought a P6 and it seems like I spend less time to make a patch on this than the Rev2. P6 has less features and everything can be tweaked directly on the front panel. I am unfortunately a victim of Hick's law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hick%27s_law) so in many cases I prefer some limitations. Otherwise I sometimes end up thinking "What if I could make this patch even better by doing some more modulation or adding a second layer..". Having a sample pack of thousands of drum samples is my worst nightmare 

[Quatschmacher]

I really like the Rev2, very versatile and fullfeatured, yet easy to use. But there have been a bit more bug issues that I hoped for. Actually, I went from VSTs to hardware synths partly because I believed bugs barely existed in hardware synths. But I believe most issues are sorted out now.

I recently bought a P6 and it seems like I spend less time to make a patch on this than the Rev2. P6 has less features and everything can be tweaked directly on the front panel. I am unfortunately a victim of Hick's law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hick%27s_law) so in many cases I prefer some limitations. Otherwise I sometimes end up thinking "What if I could make this patch even better by doing some more modulation or adding a second layer..". Having a sample pack of thousands of drum samples is my worst nightmare 

I hadn’t heard of Hick’s Law until now, but I’m totally suffering from it too. I’m fact, just contemplating which poly to buy has already consumed so much time!

[MPM]

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.   

Oh, that’s how this thread started. 

Anyway, as for programming patches, I resigned ages ago to working with the existing patches. C’mon, there’s like 5,000 of them. Made by boffins who live for this kind of masochism. I’ve also bought Analog Audio 1’s sound banks. Sheesh, Just ad a tweak here and there and declare yourself a genius. 
If it still sounds too (whatever he said?) just copy and layer A+B with some slop, or get BIGGER MONITORS.

I’ve been using my 16 voice with the OB-6 for almost a year and neither does what the other can as well as the other does it. And I just ordered the P6 after weeks on trial, not to replace the Rev2, but for the same reason the OB-6 compliments the Rev2.
(Oh, and because yeh, controlling layer B with midi while playing the A layer by hand is just...midi issues)

Anyway, get the P6 and keep the Rev2. Get all three. When the Rev2 vexes your mood, go get touchy twiddly with the P6. Touch them both at the same time 

[S Y Z Y G Y X]

I like this cat ^^^

[MKDVB]

Interesting thread, I've wanted to break up with my Rev2 many times & if the resale value hadn't dropped so hard, it'd probably already be gone but inevitably, I'm always glad it stayed. Part of it is that it's my most expensive synth ever so I want to crush hard on the sound. But it just doesn't touch me the same way that my 106 or Monomachine does.

I also demand a lot of multi-functionality from my gear. Only the Juno is allowed to do just one thing. The Rev2 serves as my main controller as well as being basically 2 analog synths but as DSI point out, it's not meant to be a controller & is pretty limited in that regard.

That said, it's so incredibly useful in my studio. It's like I wanted the romance of my life & this thing is basically my mom: annoys me at times but I'd miss her terribly when she's gone! I've had the OB6, Pro2 & Tempest come through here in hopes of moving her on but Rev2 is the only one that's stayed.

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.

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

Which other analog synth would you recommend over the Rev2 if one could only have ONE synth? Obviously a digital synty or workstation could take care of a lot of needs but as far as analog?

Interesting that you say it has a certain character all its own ... it's one I have a hard time discerning. One of its charms is that when I need it to emulate another synth's patch, ranging from Juno 106 to OB6 to Casio XW-G1, it usually gets about 80-90% of the way there. Mind, that 20% is a huge difference but I tried to recreate my favorite Rev2 patch on the OB6 & couldn't even come close ... of the two, the OB6 sounded better & could "touch" me but it's 2019 & I for one don't always want a warm vintage tone on everything.

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.

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.

I had the DM12 & sold it to get the Rev2. I liked it a lot ... still the best unison sound I've heard & loved how the mod matrix is laid out all at once. I got rid in part because I was worried its resale value would plummet (it did) but one thing I noticed is how much the FX really goosed the sound. That's fine, FX are great but why oh why does it NOT HAVE EXT INS?!?!?!?!?  I'd pick up the module in a flash if it did. 

When I bought my rev2, the guy demo'd the sounds & I'd constantly ask him to take off the FX & there'd hardly be any difference!

Do you think the UB-XA can stand in for the OB6? I did love that sound & if I could get it at a fraction of the cost ...

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.

Multi mode is one of my favorite things about the Rev2, though its implementation is a bit wonky & there's a bug that makes the fx go all ringmod-y at times. I'll often sequence 2 A & B layers, turn off local control & use Rev2 as controller for another box. As you say, it's essentially 2 synths in a box so it's nice to have access to them as such. Could have been implemented a lot better though ...  a split with each side on its own midi channel would have been nice & a better patch UI. DSI seem to be trying to fit square pegs into round holes with its current way of organizing. Dave needs to maybe pay more attention to user interface, I think. Knobs are nice but as machines get more powerful, users need similarly capable methods of harnessing that power & organizing their work & I think DSI are stuck in a 20th century paradigm.

Have to say, I haven't had that many problems with MIDI but I do have a hard time getting it to work together smoothly with the Monomachine & with the Deluge, sometimes Program Change will trigger & sometimes not but not sure if that's the Rev2 or Deluge (also new, with bugs).  I don't do anything too complicated though

[Razmo]

Refering to the last post above:

Well... that is exactly what you should NOT be doing with a synth... trying to make it sound like another synth because you will almost always be disappointed... more with some synths than others of course... I did not get to like my REV2 by playing the factory presets, nor trying to emulate something else... i came to like it by being creative, and doing unique sounds on the REV2 that it do best... And I can assure you, that if I try to replicate any of these sounds I've done on something else, I'll be disappointed as well.... If you want Juno... get Juno! ... if you want MOOG, get MOOG!... I cannot say it any other way really.

If I had to choose ONE synth right now only, I'd probably take the PEAK... It is flexible, has a very nice tone to it, and will be much more complex than any analog polysynth... but with that said, I've got sounds I've made for the REV2 that I would miss if I only had the PEAK... that is why I tend to get more than one synth... synths that have a uniqueness to them, and that complement each other. But it is a hard choice because almost all synths will have something unique in one way or the other.

Currently I've got the REV2... it gives me the most voices in any synth I've got, and it's the only one that has layering capabilities, greatly expanding it's sonic territory... coupled with it's FX engine i can get the most beautiful pads, strings and choral sounds out of it, and also plucked and bowed sounds when tamed right... it's down to the polyphony and FX engine paired with the dual timbrality that no other synths of mine has... I learned that I cannot live without it.

I also have the PEAK... it's really clear in it's tone, really good for tight and bright tones... gorgeous wavetable tones and FM sounds, and has the best god damned reverb built into any synth I've heard.. it's basses is booming, but tight, but it can still sound old and dusty... it's just a really good and very flexible synth... I learned that I cannot live without it.

Then there is my TEMPEST... it has a tone remnicent of the REV2, but still it's different... more raw, has more presence, and it's sequencer is in a league of it's own... it has several flaws, but it's a love/hate relationship... I use it mainly for creating six sequenced tracks that I use as backing (Berlin School type of sequences), or as a drummachine... it is essential for me as a "metronome" when running and playing other synth lines along with it live.

And today i received the DeepMind12D ... I've not used it much, but I believe it will also be "it's own"... it has the most advanced FX engine of them all, which means it will probably be used for other types of sounds focusing more on FX...

I have more synths on on my mind for the future... Prophet 12 module, OB-6 module, P6 module, Evolver Desktop, Hypersynth Xenophone, Waldorf Pulse 2... etc. etc...

the point is; I do not want to part with my synths anymore just because they do not do everything because I've tried so many times selling my synths, only to miss them and buying them again... sometimes multiple times... it's not worth it... yes, you will become tired of them after a while, just like kids get tired of their toys, but if you put them away for a while, the toys always gets interesting again at some point.... so that is my advice... unless you need the money selling a synth, then don't... store it away, and get whatever it is that you want and play with it... at some point in time you will want to swap them again... suddenly you see something on the net, discussing one of your older synths, and you want to mess around with it again...

And about REV2 multimode: I do not see it as two synths even if it's built halfway like that... i see it as ONE because that is the way a preset is built... if it was to be true dual timbral, it would have had two edit buffers, one for each synth, and a program would only have had ONE layer in it... I see the halfway multimode as sort of a "bonus feature" ... just the way you have to change presets if you use it as two synths make me cringe my toes... very unintuitive... and thus, i only use it as a single synth. So again; if you want true dual timbral, GET true dual timbral somewhere else where it works the way you want it to... In my opinion, Sequential could throw out the multimode on their dual timbral synths, it's useless to me to be honest, when it's not properly done.

Besides... the dual timbrality and multimode is just an additional gimmick... i do believe that the main reason for Sequential to make their synths dual timbral has nothing to do with multitimbrality, it was made for two purposes: 1. Stacked Mode and 2. Split mode... multimode is just a "broken add-on". But do not get me wrong, I LOVE the dual timbrality for the first two reasons... it's a VERY powerful feature for sound design... I often use one layer for building a transient, and the other for the tone itself... very very handy for a lot of sounds actually.

[timboréale]

To add to what Razmo said, which I wholeheartedly agree with, the Rev2 really should be looked at as its own thing and appreciated in that light.

Personally, my "one synth to rule them all" desert island synth would be a Nord Lead. I have an A1 and it does the bulk of synth duties in my studio - since it's four part true multitimbral and has 26(!) voices with 'free' unison it's an incredibly useful sound tool. It also has a very acceptable FX section per slot. I wouldn't part with my Nord Stage Compact either, but that's mostly used as a piano/organ with a synth back, rather than as a main synth on it's own.

But, the Rev2 has a clear place - first off, it's got a very nice 5 octave keyboard, which I enjoy just for that alone (I can see why Razmo uses it for his main controller) and it leaves my 6-octave Nord Stage compact for more piano-like duties. Second, since each layer is 2 oscillators AND a sub AND a noise generator, that leaves each layer quite a bit more complex than the Nord - I'd have to use 2 slots on the Nord to get the same oscillator configuration. And even compared to something as complex as a Nord Lead 3, the modulation options on the Rev2 are second to none - tons of routing possibilities, that extra envelope, the sequencer... seriously useful stuff there for performance or studio work. It has nearly the same level of control as my Moog subsequent 37! (Excepting the filter drive and independent OSC mix, of course, but of those, only the filter drive is really missed and that's just part of the Rev2's unique sound, really.)

And it's got a sound that's right in the sweet spot between classic Prophet and modern numeric oscillators. I think people unfairly criticize it by listening to it, and it alone, when it's so easy to fit into a mix beautifully.

So, I'm with Razmo - is it a perfect synth, no, none are! Could it be a "desert island" synth? Definitely, though that really depends on what you're looking for. It's certainly deep enough and has enough potential. For me, it offers a very different yet compatible sound to what I get from my Nords. Another voice in the choir, so to speak, with its own timbre and suited for its own parts. Still, the tremendous polyphony, the richness of the oscillators and the very useful slop and other modulatable parameters, combined with the utility of the onboard FX to bring out another side to the sound, make it a compelling synth, especially at it's current price range. I can't see any justification for letting it go, and I seem to continue to find good reasons to keep it.

Other synths that I find incredibly useful: Elektron Digitone, Moog Minitaur. The Rev2 is a very nice complement to these as well, and they both punch well above their price. Heck, the three together could be had for a song and you'd have an immense palette of sound design at your fingertips.

[creativespiral]

I'd just like to say... don't break up with the Rev2!!  She'll just move on to a better man, and you'll regret breaking up with her... you'll get stuck with a more expensive broad (I mean board) who has fewer skills.  Also, after the breakup she'll find herself and get all fit... and her personality will shine... just making you realize you were holding her back all along.

Seriously though, check out this video I uploaded on VCO harmonic jitter (and replicating with Rev2 modulation).   This method reduces the pristine quality of upper harmonics to replicate the same sort of high register frequency wash as VCOs.  This is one small step to reduce coldness/harshness.   

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Amhl07TVdNM

(more discussion about this in the thread:  Question about Fine Tune Modulation, DCOs - https://forum.sequential.com/index.php/topic,3412.0.html)

And in a few more days, I'm gonna have some more news to share that may make you realize the Rev2 is the one you want to marry.   

[OakBloodThree]

Anyway, as for programming patches, I resigned ages ago to working with the existing patches. C’mon, there’s like 5,000 of them. Made by boffins who live for this kind of masochism. I’ve also bought Analog Audio 1’s sound banks. Sheesh, Just ad a tweak here and there and declare yourself a genius. 

I've only had the Rev2 for a couple months and I almost immediately set to making new patches.  If I weren't a patch-building boffin, I probably would have become bored with the machine pretty quickly.

To be sure, some of the 512 factory presets are usable, but many seem to be designed only to impress prospective buyers on a sales floor (yes, I know this is the case with other synths too).  Other programs seem to be just to show the maximal capabilities of the modulation matrix, and sequencer.  Many of the musical presets are so aggressive and thick, there's no room for anything else.  Others are just not suited to the kind of music that I make.

Anyway, I started out building some wacky patches to find my way around the parameters. Now, I'm more focused on creating musically-useful ones, that will cooperate with my other instruments and voice.

[MKDVB]

Refering to the last post above:

Well... that is exactly what you should NOT be doing with a synth... trying to make it sound like another synth because you will almost always be disappointed... more with some synths than others of course... I did not get to like my REV2 by playing the factory presets, nor trying to emulate something else... i came to like it by being creative, and doing unique sounds on the REV2 that it do best... And I can assure you, that if I try to replicate any of these sounds I've done on something else, I'll be disappointed as well.... If you want Juno... get Juno! ... if you want MOOG, get MOOG!... I cannot say it any other way really.

If I had to choose ONE synth right now only, I'd probably take the PEAK... It is flexible, has a very nice tone to it, and will be much more complex than any analog polysynth... but with that said, I've got sounds I've made for the REV2 that I would miss if I only had the PEAK... that is why I tend to get more than one synth... synths that have a uniqueness to them, and that complement each other. But it is a hard choice because almost all synths will have something unique in one way or the other.

Currently I've got the REV2... it gives me the most voices in any synth I've got, and it's the only one that has layering capabilities, greatly expanding it's sonic territory... coupled with it's FX engine i can get the most beautiful pads, strings and choral sounds out of it, and also plucked and bowed sounds when tamed right... it's down to the polyphony and FX engine paired with the dual timbrality that no other synths of mine has... I learned that I cannot live without it.

I also have the PEAK... it's really clear in it's tone, really good for tight and bright tones... gorgeous wavetable tones and FM sounds, and has the best god damned reverb built into any synth I've heard.. it's basses is booming, but tight, but it can still sound old and dusty... it's just a really good and very flexible synth... I learned that I cannot live without it.

Then there is my TEMPEST... it has a tone remnicent of the REV2, but still it's different... more raw, has more presence, and it's sequencer is in a league of it's own... it has several flaws, but it's a love/hate relationship... I use it mainly for creating six sequenced tracks that I use as backing (Berlin School type of sequences), or as a drummachine... it is essential for me as a "metronome" when running and playing other synth lines along with it live.

And today i received the DeepMind12D ... I've not used it much, but I believe it will also be "it's own"... it has the most advanced FX engine of them all, which means it will probably be used for other types of sounds focusing more on FX...

I have more synths on on my mind for the future... Prophet 12 module, OB-6 module, P6 module, Evolver Desktop, Hypersynth Xenophone, Waldorf Pulse 2... etc. etc...

the point is; I do not want to part with my synths anymore just because they do not do everything because I've tried so many times selling my synths, only to miss them and buying them again... sometimes multiple times... it's not worth it... yes, you will become tired of them after a while, just like kids get tired of their toys, but if you put them away for a while, the toys always gets interesting again at some point.... so that is my advice... unless you need the money selling a synth, then don't... store it away, and get whatever it is that you want and play with it... at some point in time you will want to swap them again... suddenly you see something on the net, discussing one of your older synths, and you want to mess around with it again...

And about REV2 multimode: I do not see it as two synths even if it's built halfway like that... i see it as ONE because that is the way a preset is built... if it was to be true dual timbral, it would have had two edit buffers, one for each synth, and a program would only have had ONE layer in it... I see the halfway multimode as sort of a "bonus feature" ... just the way you have to change presets if you use it as two synths make me cringe my toes... very unintuitive... and thus, i only use it as a single synth. So again; if you want true dual timbral, GET true dual timbral somewhere else where it works the way you want it to... In my opinion, Sequential could throw out the multimode on their dual timbral synths, it's useless to me to be honest, when it's not properly done.

Besides... the dual timbrality and multimode is just an additional gimmick... i do believe that the main reason for Sequential to make their synths dual timbral has nothing to do with multitimbrality, it was made for two purposes: 1. Stacked Mode and 2. Split mode... multimode is just a "broken add-on". But do not get me wrong, I LOVE the dual timbrality for the first two reasons... it's a VERY powerful feature for sound design... I often use one layer for building a transient, and the other for the tone itself... very very handy for a lot of sounds actually.

No offense, I find your posts very informative & helpful but I'll use my synths the way I want to. 

For instance, when writing, I like to work with all my gear in real-time vs multi-tracking over audio so if the intro is some Juno lead but I want to switch the Juno over to bass, another synth now needs to carry the intro until I start tracking & I'll often switch over to the Rev2 in cases like this because it's interface is the best I have for making patches. And oftentimes, it will actually win out over whoever it's standing in for when it comes time to record.

Then it also boils down to not all of us can afford to get all the synths we want so choices & compromises have to be made. I couldn't afford to keep both the Rev2 & OB6 (personally, I'm not sure I'd want to even if I could for personal reasons) so trying to port over some of the patches seems logical. You're right of course ... you can never get all the way there & there's bound to be unsatisfaction so choices have to be made. 

Like you, I miss every synth I've ever owned, including that Casio XW-G1 even if that thing frustrated me to no end.

As for not seeing Rev2 as 2 synths in a box, you said that! I just repeated it. And again, I'll use it as I choose to. Not sure why you keep telling me how to use it .... different people have different needs. Multimode works fine for me ... in fact, it's probably the feature I use most. Splits are nice when I'm just playing on the keys. Stacks sound great when I'm just sitting there tinkling but in a full mix, I often wind up leaving a layer out as it's too dense in a mix. I'll have to explore your suggestion of using both layers to build one sound vs the common layering of 2 different sounds. Works for me as I find it weird to approach sound design in terms of 2 completely different layers.