The Official Sequential/DSI Forum

Rev2: Most outstanding limitation/problem/missing function/fix request of all

     It may not be discussed much, idk. But by far the biggest 'problem' with the Rev2 (a great synth) is that it is not actually fully bitimbral, because it's not bitimbral pitchbend, modwheel, or aftertouch. The magnitude of this issue can't be appreciated until you consider all the implications.
    1. Obviously, you can't have those controllers affects both layers independently despite the owners manual misleadingly saying the exact opposite on bottom p15-top of page 16. So, not fully bitimbral. To claim otherwise is a lie. Just because it can respond to notes independently does not mean it is reasonable to then call it bitimbral without always including explanation of it's limitation. That's because by a similarly twisted misleading logic you could  have a second layer than didn't even respond to note values, and you were then forced to use OSC freq CC to create different pitches. Yes that would be bitimbral also, but you see no one would accept a claim of it being so without explaining the limitation. So no, it's not bitimbral, not unless you explain. Because when you say bitimbral with no footnotes, that necessarily is reasonably taken to mean fully bitimbral.
     2. The behavior of the synth is always to 'merge' such controllers, from whatever source on whatever of the two MIDI channels, be it local or external. This can be highly disruptive and annoying when trying to work, but especially when trying to audition different patches for one layer while have the other layer playing.  You ALWAYS* have to edit some patch or the other to turn off the controller response of if it, so you can still have those controllers, and audition their effect, with the completely distracting unwanted affect on the other layer. *It's not practical or thinkable to save your patches with those controllers disabled. So you are constantly dealing with that 'unnecessary' hassle and pain. It is a constantly disenchanting experience in what would otherwise be an even more enchanting hardware synth. It's just 'saddening'. Sequential has not been forthcoming with explanation. It's seems after all this time, few people have taken the time to look at this issue close enough to realize it's true magnitude. This illustrates that, despite our intuition about such perceptual occurrences, such things do sometimes happen.
     3. What makes the situation even more problematic is the fact that polychaining is NOT supported on the Rev2. IF it were not for the controller issue, polychaining would NOT be important, you could just use a 16 voice rev2. But since the controller thing IS an issue, (the largest of all, actually), you can't as easily work around it by using two 8 voice units in polychain. You can 'sortof' by something like trying to send the left hand to one unit and right hand to another, but the logistics of all that would probably be very complicated and tedious.  With a separate controller that can send on two channels (and two ports even better) with splits, it might be possible, but very cumbersome to say the least. There would also be patch management complications.
      Summary: Whereas, if this issue was taken SERIOUSLY, with the seriousness appropriate for it's true magnitude... if it was possible to create a global controller response switch for  A+ B independent, A only, B only, and A+B merge (the way it is now)..that would, not just resolve this issue, the biggest one of all, but it would dramatically elevate the status, power, and magnificence of an already great synth. With all it's power and provisions, two pairs of outputs, etc... it is SCREAMING for this undelivered capability, one that it IS represented to have. It's seems that scream is maybe not exactly in the audible range somehow, in a manner of speaking.  Please, tune in.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2020, 02:59:32 PM by eltouristo »