*warning - long post incoming*
Apologies for using the word "classic" (so subjective in many ways) in the title, but I thought that having spent a couple of weeks with my new Rev2 that I'd share my thoughts on the topic of "the Rev2 sounds harsh" / "get a Prophet 6 if you want that warm analogue sound". The reason being there is quite a lot of discussion on this around the internet and it was a topic that as a potential buyer I was wary of myself, and so I thought that maybe sharing my thoughts in a post may help any future waverers decide either way.
To add a bit of context, my reason for wanting a new synth was that I wanted to replace my old Sequential Pro One (still working away!) for live work for a particular project. I basically needed a synth that could do everything the Pro One can do, and more. What I love (admittedly fairly simple) about the Pro One is the sound of those 2 *almost* in tune oscillators going in and out of phase in that warm sort of heathaze way, then add a bit of medium to slow LFO to the Osc Frequencies and with the Cutoff set not too high and a little reverb you can get some lovely mellow sounds reminiscent of Eno's
Another Green World or
Before and After Science or Harmonia etc. Also I often "tricked" the Pro One into a sort of polyphony by setting the Arpeggiator at a high rate and holding down more than one note so that a kind of stuttered chord was made, but the stutter wouldn't continue when only playing one note - I wanted an Arpeggiator that behaved in the same way. I thought Sequential / DSI would be a good place to start as surely their instruments must still contain some of the Pro One DNA, and I was excited to be able to take advantage of such "modern" (remember I'm coming from using a 1981 monosynth here!) features as polyphony, fx and splits and stacks, oh and patch memory!
I was particularly keen on the idea of splitting the keyboard so I could say play monosynth bass on the left and then play chords via the Layer B output -> my Kaoss Pad for chords / leads etc.
I was aware that although the Rev2 had the more numerous modulation capabilities, and of course the stack/split feature, that there was some talk of it sounding harsh, and if I wanted to achieve that old school analogue sound I'd be better off going with the Prophet 6. Watching some of the reviews and other related vids on YouTube I did think myself that the Rev2 had a sort of harshness to it - sort of harsh metallic-brassy with lots of brittle reverb. I decided in the end to take the chance and go for the Rev2 since I already have some old analogue synths from the 70's-80's which I can still use for recording if I want that sound, and the Rev2 would open things up a lot for me playing live with keyboard splits and fx etc.
Anyway, two weeks later and I'm somewhat relieved to say I'm really happy with the Rev2's ability to get those sounds I was after. I'm able to start with a basic patch in Unison mode (set to '1 Voice') and get those two DCOs (which of course are analogue oscillators just pitched by a digital clock) going in and out of phase in that same heathaze-y way either with a little Fine Tune or Slop, dial back the Cutoff a little and add some LFO and I'm straight in that very Sequential-sounding Pro One land, now with added reverb. I also spent some time testing the Rev2 by having a go at making some older sounds like the Prophet 5 patch in Genesis'
Man On The Corner / Phil Collins'
In The Air Tonight which to my ears I've got sounding exactly right; also Tony Banks' organ patch he made on his Prophet 10, based on the first 4 drawbars of his Hammond, again I've got that sounding just right. I made a very convincing Solina String Synth sound by using the Shape Mod to thin out the sawtooths and stack a version of the Solina Violin preset over the Solina Horn patch on Layer B. I even had a go at the previously-unprogrammable 'Fuzz Guitar 1' preset off the ARP Pro Soloist, the Rev2 can get pretty close, closest I've heard other than on my Pro Soloist! And thankfully the Arpeggiator works in the same way so I can do my old Pro One trick.
And maybe herein lies some kind of contributory factor to this topic - most of those "old school" analogue sounds are fairly simple really - often maybe just using a couple of oscillators, an LFO and a Filter Envelope. And of course all the promotional vids for the Rev2 are naturally going to be trying to show off as many of the features - the massive mod matrix, the splits, the FX etc. That plus the very real possibility that many of the presets / reviewers etc are informed by certain genres of music that I'm not interested in, and well you can end up with a very different take on a synth that basically has so many capabilities. I tend to gravitate towards more mellow / 'rural' synth sounds as opposed to brash urban sounds, even on the Pro One and my other old synths I'll never have the Cutoff up too high. Anyway, what I'm saying is - don't be fooled by the presets, or indeed the sound of the Rev2 with all it's engines firing at once - dial things back a little and program how you would "back in the day" for want of a better phrase (I am more into these sounds from a taste point of view btw, not nostalgia!), and the sounds are easily attainable, and sound great to me. Also I should say that the fact that the Rev2 is capable of so much more than these basic old school sounds, harsh sounding or not, is really exciting to me and I'm looking forward to exploring the extended mod matrix etc.
I also wonder if maybe some of the people who don't like the sound of the Rev2 are used to a more Moogy type sound whether through hardware or VSTs, and Sequential doesn't fit with their idea of "warm" or whatever - anyway, all speculation and of course everyone has their own taste, each to their own and for their own reasons. I'm also sure the Prophet 6 sounds great with its VCOs and filter; but happy to say here that I'm glad I went with the Rev2. The split/layering capabilities plus all the other features are going to be a massive benefit for my live work, and also I can still get those "classic" sounds if I want to.
4 Replies
3341 Views