Rev2, the Neverending Story

[Sacred Synthesis]

I can only imagine what it must be like to be a hardware synth designer these days.  Modern software has changed the expectation that the synth should be constantly updated to do things well beyond what it was originally designed to do, and that the company should keep pouring development money into a product to make it support integration with other vendor's products and eating the loss.

Back in the day, if you made a great sounding instrument, some band would eventually use it, and once it had been seen on stage and "validated" as being capable of producing great music, most didn't question whether they wanted one or not ...  Nobody came along in the days of the Prophet 5 and said "Hey Dave, Native Instruments just released some new gizmo, are you going to add support for that to all your product line"?

Note, I'm not supporting buggy software releases - synths should do what they are designed to do, they should be well tested and the show stopping bugs fixed.  I'm just not convinced that there should be an expectation that a musical instrument should be updated later, free of charge, to do things it wasn't originally sold as being able to do (and I've seen similar requests in some threads).

In terms of my own Rev2, I may have gotten lucky because while I felt it was a "buggy" synth when I first got it, most of the warts turned out to be a matter of my own overcoming of the learning curve.

I don't expect a product to be constantly or continually updated, I just expect it to deliver what it's supposed to.

"I'm just not convinced that there should be an expectation that a musical instrument should be updated later, free of charge, to do things it wasn't originally sold as being able to do (and I've seen similar requests in some threads)."
I agree about expectations. And I think I have requested one or two features in that request thread... However, I see two sides to it; the more features and the better they actually work, is good marketing, which makes for more sales. It can also be thought of as a way of rolling out a product prematurely to have the customers do the beta-testing for free, roughly speaking, to keep costs down. It's not uncommon. I expected this, because of the competitive price of the Rev2, so I had that in consideration when getting it... I don't have a problem with this if the product is finished to fulfill its original claims of function, but I do expect the OS to be updated to do just that sooner than later, at the very least... If some functions are added, it's a win-win situation imo.

I've adapted to this modern method of releasing a new instrument; that is, I've come to expect it, but it does still shock me.  What I dislike about it is that it requires a customer to maintain an ongoing relationship with a company.  Not everyone wants to do that, and not everyone wants to follow forums for years.  Some people just want to buy an instrument and then be off with it, never to look back.  For them, the purchase is the end of the business/techinical aspect and the beginning of the purely musical.  But now, buying a synthesizer is only the beginning of a long and complicated period of watching and waiting for the expected problems to be resolved, features to be added, and all this through updates that - as this forum often records - sometimes go quite badly.  It's a bit like getting tangled up in a net, when you had intended only to quickly swim by.

[jdt9517]

I feel so lucky.  I bought a P-08, P-12, and Pro-2, all new.  None of them have had a lick of problems. 

I would be horrified if I had some of the problems with these synths that people have metioned on this thread. 

[Sacred Synthesis]

I totally agree, Jim.  Other than a few bumps here and there, I've had the best of experiences with my Prophet '08s and Poly Evolvers.  I couldn't possibly put together a post full of griefs, not even about all of my instruments combined.

One thing I didn't foresee years ago was how quickly instruments would come and go.  A decade in this industry is like a century.  For example, the Prophet 12 Keyboard came and went so quickly, I never had a chance to finance one.  I believe the P'08 was around for ten years, and even that seemed like a blink of the eye.  It creates an anxious feeling that, if you're interested in a new instrument, you had better buy it quickly.  But then, with the current practice, it makes good sense to wait and observe a new instrument until it has been fully fixed and developed.  And then you've got how long until it's suddenly retired?  It makes it so difficult to have a long-term plan to assemble that "perfect" set up, and then to quit all the spending. 

Goodness gracious.  Harpsichord, anyone?

[maxter]

I’m on the latest version posted in these forums for my Rev2

This may sound dumb, but perhaps you could try downdating to a previous OS, and see if the problem persists? On mine it only occurred with a particular OS, and as I mentioned earlier I've also had another strange bug on another OS that seemingly only affected MY unit, on THAT particular OS. That time I simply downdated to the earlier OS version (after trying to debug the problem, reinstalling, calibrating etc...) and awaited the next-yet OS, on which "my" bug disappeared. It sucks, but I don't know what else to do.

Yeah, this thread is depressing...

[maxter]

One thing I didn't foresee years ago was how quickly instruments would come and go.  A decade in this industry is like a century.  For example, the Prophet 12 Keyboard came and went so quickly, I never had a chance to finance one.  I believe the P'08 was around for ten years, and even that seemed like a blink of the eye.  It creates an anxious feeling that, if you're interested in a new instrument, you had better buy it quickly.  But then, with the current practice, it makes good sense to wait and observe a new instrument until it has been fully fixed and developed.  And then you've got how long until it's suddenly retired?  It makes it so difficult to have a long-term plan to assemble that "perfect" set up, and then to quit all the spending. 

Goodness gracious.  Harpsichord, anyone?

Spot on. I was just about to get the Prophet 12 when the Rev2 was released. I was hesitant because of losing the gated sequencers of the P'08, which I had come to love working with. I felt that I "needed" (read: wanted) more modulation slots, and an extra oscillator. That on the P12 with 12 voices, 4 oscs, more wave-shapes, and the "character"-section had me sold eventually. But with the Rev2 I'd get to keep the gated sequencers, more mod-slots, more wave-shapes and get the Sub-osc... I knew it wouldn't be "finished" yet (mainly thinking of the added sequencer, arp, syncs and stuff), but I thought it could do what the P'08 was capable of, at least. The Rev2 was seemingly going to cover both fields of what I wanted with a Prophet, but as of now I think the P'08+P12 would have been a better choice in my case. The P'08 for the complex sequencing and leads, and the P12 for the rest.

There actually was some quirk with the P'08 LFO sync, I recall, which made for some minor "glitchy" results when used with the sequencers, which I considered more as a character, and interesting anomaly, rather than a problem. I could perhaps call it "cute". That's one thing, most synths have some, but the Rev2 is something else.

[LPF83]

I can only imagine what it must be like to be a hardware synth designer these days.  Modern software has changed the expectation that the synth should be constantly updated to do things well beyond what it was originally designed to do, and that the company should keep pouring development money into a product to make it support integration with other vendor's products and eating the loss.

Back in the day, if you made a great sounding instrument, some band would eventually use it, and once it had been seen on stage and "validated" as being capable of producing great music, most didn't question whether they wanted one or not ...  Nobody came along in the days of the Prophet 5 and said "Hey Dave, Native Instruments just released some new gizmo, are you going to add support for that to all your product line"?

Note, I'm not supporting buggy software releases - synths should do what they are designed to do, they should be well tested and the show stopping bugs fixed.  I'm just not convinced that there should be an expectation that a musical instrument should be updated later, free of charge, to do things it wasn't originally sold as being able to do (and I've seen similar requests in some threads).

In terms of my own Rev2, I may have gotten lucky because while I felt it was a "buggy" synth when I first got it, most of the warts turned out to be a matter of my own overcoming of the learning curve.

I don't expect a product to be constantly or continually updated, I just expect it to deliver what it's supposed to.

"I'm just not convinced that there should be an expectation that a musical instrument should be updated later, free of charge, to do things it wasn't originally sold as being able to do (and I've seen similar requests in some threads)."
I agree about expectations. And I think I have requested one or two features in that request thread... However, I see two sides to it; the more features and the better they actually work, is good marketing, which makes for more sales. It can also be thought of as a way of rolling out a product prematurely to have the customers do the beta-testing for free, roughly speaking, to keep costs down. It's not uncommon. I expected this, because of the competitive price of the Rev2, so I had that in consideration when getting it... I don't have a problem with this if the product is finished to fulfill its original claims of function, but I do expect the OS to be updated to do just that sooner than later, at the very least... If some functions are added, it's a win-win situation imo.

I've adapted to this modern method of releasing a new instrument; that is, I've come to expect it, but it does still shock me.  What I dislike about it is that it requires a customer to maintain an ongoing relationship with a company.  Not everyone wants to do that, and not everyone wants to follow forums for years.  Some people just want to buy an instrument and then be off with it, never to look back.  For them, the purchase is the end of the business/techinical aspect and the beginning of the purely musical.  But now, buying a synthesizer is only the beginning of a long and complicated period of watching and waiting for the expected problems to be resolved, features to be added, and all this through updates that - as this forum often records - sometimes go quite badly.  It's a bit like getting tangled up in a net, when you had intended only to quickly swim by.

What's interesting is Dave has said the whole reason he does hardware is that he wants to create an instrument and put it out there, not spend time updating it as with softwaret:  https://youtu.be/gRFDGMw4AOM?t=449

But, the reality is that hardware and software are never really mutually exclusive in synths ... it's just a question of where the notch on the hardware/software mix knob falls.

[Sacred Synthesis]

Yes, there's some sort of conflict here.  I don't know if Dave puts his heart and soul into the intial designing of an instrument, but then leaves the ugly maintenance aspect to his staff, ot if the growth of the company has pushed it beyond the simple noble ideals of Dave's earlier vision.  Something does seem amiss to those of us who have followed DSI/Sequential for a decade or more.

At the time when DSI was producing nothing but the Evolvers (2007?), the company was selling a DVD interview with Dave in which he expressed thoughts and ideas that had me glowing with admiration.  It was the kind of stuff he became famous for - assertions that it was all about producing musical instruments that you can hold in your hands and feel and play without a computer.  Portions of it were also on YouTube.  But then it all disappeared, and I've never since been able to find even a snippet of it.  Those were the statements that hooked me on DSI, that made me feel I had found "my" company.  But much has changed since then, even as Dave continues to speak in the exact same terms and ways.  It's a bit of a mystery.  At the risk of sounding nostalgic, I do miss those early days of DSI...very much.

[LPF83]

Yes, there's some sort of conflict here.  I don't know if Dave puts his heart and soul into the intial designing of an instrument, but then leaves the ugly maintenance aspect to his staff, ot if the growth of the company has pushed it beyond the simple noble ideals of Dave's earlier vision.  Something does seem amiss to those of us who have followed DSI/Sequential for a decade or more.

At the time when DSI was producing nothing but the Evolvers (2007?), the company was selling a DVD interview with Dave in which he expressed thoughts and ideas that had me glowing with admiration.  It was the kind of stuff he became famous for - assertions that it was all about producing musical instruments that you can hold in your hands and feel and play without a computer.  Portions of it were also on YouTube.  But then it all disappeared, and I've never since been able to find even a snippet of it.  Those were the statements that hooked me on DSI, that made me feel I had found "my" company.  But much has changed since then, even as Dave continues to speak in the exact same terms and ways.  It's a bit of a mystery.  At the risk of sounding nostalgic, I do miss those early days of DSI...very much.

Being involved in technology product engineering for many decades as well (not quite as long as Dave, but a long time), my observation is that sometimes the entrepreneural brilliance that leads to the forming of the original company runs into challenges the moment it needs to scale.   I've seen cases where the brilliant inventor / engineer / product designer does not have the organizational skills and tolerance for mundane business matters that it takes to successfully manage a QA department -- and one might say "so hire a good QA director", and while that overall plan is optimal, it's far from as easy as it sounds.  A good QA director/manager is tasked with the goal of maximizing quality of the product, but at the same time the company owner might find that the same processes that ensure product quality result in exponential labor cost increases or delays to market.   It is an understatement to say it's a difficult balance to get right.

To be honest though, I think what Dave is doing is nothing short of phenomenal.  Sequential synths are the only product available today that offer the sound I'm looking for.   Moogs are nice but to my ears they just don't have "it".  Korgs kind of have it but the 'logue line is not in the same league as Sequential.  Don't even get me started on Roland, they are just lost in my opinion.

For that reason, my next synth is going to be Sequential, and the only reason I haven't placed an order for a P6 to complement my OB-6 and Rev2 is that I want to see what the new synth announced in August is.

All in all I don't expect Dave to be perfect -- I still love what he's doing and hope he continues to do it for the foreseeable future.

[Sacred Synthesis]

I totally agree with you. 

The visionary is most often an idealist or a perfectionist whose standards are impractical.  But in making them more practical with the help of a few realists, something beautiful and rare is lost.  I far prefer the former over the latter.  But survival in the business domain requires growth, and I would attribute the changes primarily to that monster.

I in no way intended my comments to be critical.  I'm only lamenting that something meaningful seems to be lacking from the earlier more boutique-ish days.  And by the way, Dave still has a few staffers from those early days.  I fondly remember frequently emailing those persons late in the day and always receiving a refreshingly personal response from them by 10 pm east coast time the same day.  And I don't recall the open and closed ticket policy that is now (understandably) in place.

Regardless, Sequential is still "my" company, even if I admittedly prefer the DSI years and products.

[Dubone]

I must be lucky, I'm very productive with my Rev 2 and don't have problems. 

[jg666]

To be honest, the few issues I've had have not spoilt my enjoyment of this synth 

I don't use DAW software and don't connect it to a computer (except for updates) so I suppose I'm experiences far less issues than others are.

[LPF83]

To be honest, the few issues I've had have not spoilt my enjoyment of this synth 

I don't use DAW software and don't connect it to a computer (except for updates) so I suppose I'm experiences far less issues than others are.

I suspect many of the bugs many folks experience have more to do with MIDI loop or similar in the DAW, which are not the fault of the synth.   Especially when using the 16 voice version of the Rev2, treating layers A and B as two independent 8-voice polys, it takes a little more focus on specific track settings in the DAW to stay on top of which layer is sending/receiving, etc.   So if folks are used to the simplicity of working with simple softsynth instrument tracks, or just having a MIDI track connected to one external instrument, it may take a bit of adjustment in thinking.

Sometimes I find myself overlooking something simple like whether one layer or the other is set to monitor=on in the Cubase track.

[maxter]

To be honest, the few issues I've had have not spoilt my enjoyment of this synth 

I don't use DAW software and don't connect it to a computer (except for updates) so I suppose I'm experiences far less issues than others are.

I suspect many of the bugs many folks experience have more to do with MIDI loop or similar in the DAW, which are not the fault of the synth.   Especially when using the 16 voice version of the Rev2, treating layers A and B as two independent 8-voice polys, it takes a little more focus on specific track settings in the DAW to stay on top of which layer is sending/receiving, etc.   So if folks are used to the simplicity of working with simple softsynth instrument tracks, or just having a MIDI track connected to one external instrument, it may take a bit of adjustment in thinking.

Sometimes I find myself overlooking something simple like whether one layer or the other is set to monitor=on in the Cubase track.

"I suspect many of the bugs many folks experience have more to do with MIDI loop or similar in the DAW"
I don't think so, and I don't think the Rev2 has been blamed in the few cases I've seen where it was user error working with a DAW. In those cases, most just ask on the forum, and the thing is sorted out pretty quick it seems. I personally have not had problems working with DAW either, or midi loops. Sure, there have been user errors popping up in the bug thread, but that doesn't make the real bugs vanish. I've often struggled for hours to get to grips with a bug, ie in what way it differs from the intended way it should work, as well as testing if the problem is specific to that particular OS etc, just to make sure I'm not at fault and to know how to correctly adress the bug. So that it makes sense to others, Sequential in particular. Bugs are bugs, and I just want the bugs fixed so it works as intended, like the Prophet'08.

And while there are many requests on the request-thread, some easier to implement, some harder, the one I really want to see implemented is the osc fine tune as a mod destination. A function which probably doesn't take TOO much effort to implement. It would half the mod slots needed to achieve the VCM technique of creativespiral. Which would make the Rev2 a serious contender to many poly VCO-synths, like the Moog One, on a different level than now. You would still have mod slots left to do some serious actual modulation as well, besides the VCM. Imo this would warrant whatever price increase due to the work of actually adding it. And the Rev2 would soon gain reputation. Considering creativespiral has even done most of the work for Sequential on this one for free, the way I see it. If I was on Sequential, I'd go "Whoa, that's amazing, how did WE not think of that?! Let's get it implemented ASAP and market this thing as the best emulation of most classic VCO-synths yet." I could bet Rev2 sales would go up. My impression of it atm would be: "Eh, just leave it for dead. It'll sell some anyway." As of now, using the VCM technique limits the mod possibilities of the patch itself to simpler, more basic synth sounds. Also, it's not as swift and easy to set up. And it wouldnt be limited to simply emulating the VCO-synths, but take them a couple steps further with increased mod possibilities.

I think they're shooting themselves in the foot big time on this one, for quite some time... I understand they were hoping to get rid of the bugs sooner, and that new bugs wouldn't pop up. At one time they were pretty quick with fixing bugs, a few here and there at least, rolling out a new OS once a month or so. That's until they just stopped, it seems. Sure, I expect them to roll out another OS eventually, but I'm afraid it too will have bugs, and that they'll ditch it after that update no matter what, by the looks of it. That's being hopeful they haven't done so already.

[LPF83]

To be honest, the few issues I've had have not spoilt my enjoyment of this synth 

I don't use DAW software and don't connect it to a computer (except for updates) so I suppose I'm experiences far less issues than others are.

I suspect many of the bugs many folks experience have more to do with MIDI loop or similar in the DAW, which are not the fault of the synth.   Especially when using the 16 voice version of the Rev2, treating layers A and B as two independent 8-voice polys, it takes a little more focus on specific track settings in the DAW to stay on top of which layer is sending/receiving, etc.   So if folks are used to the simplicity of working with simple softsynth instrument tracks, or just having a MIDI track connected to one external instrument, it may take a bit of adjustment in thinking.

Sometimes I find myself overlooking something simple like whether one layer or the other is set to monitor=on in the Cubase track.

"I suspect many of the bugs many folks experience have more to do with MIDI loop or similar in the DAW"
I don't think so, and I don't think the Rev2 has been blamed in the few cases I've seen where it was user error working with a DAW. In those cases, most just ask on the forum, and the thing is sorted out pretty quick it seems. I personally have not had problems working with DAW either, or midi loops. Sure, there have been user errors popping up in the bug thread, but that doesn't make the real bugs vanish. I've often struggled for hours to get to grips with a bug, ie in what way it differs from the intended way it should work, as well as testing if the problem is specific to that particular OS etc, just to make sure I'm not at fault and to know how to correctly adress the bug. So that it makes sense to others, Sequential in particular. Bugs are bugs, and I just want the bugs fixed so it works as intended, like the Prophet'08.

And while there are many requests on the request-thread, some easier to implement, some harder, the one I really want to see implemented is the osc fine tune as a mod destination. A function which probably doesn't take TOO much effort to implement. It would half the mod slots needed to achieve the VCM technique of creativespiral. Which would make the Rev2 a serious contender to many poly VCO-synths, like the Moog One, on a different level than now. You would still have mod slots left to do some serious actual modulation as well, besides the VCM. Imo this would warrant whatever price increase due to the work of actually adding it. And the Rev2 would soon gain reputation. Considering creativespiral has even done most of the work for Sequential on this one for free, the way I see it. If I was on Sequential, I'd go "Whoa, that's amazing, how did WE not think of that?! Let's get it implemented ASAP and market this thing as the best emulation of most classic VCO-synths yet." I could bet Rev2 sales would go up. My impression of it atm would be: "Eh, just leave it for dead. It'll sell some anyway." As of now, using the VCM technique limits the mod possibilities of the patch itself to simpler, more basic synth sounds. Also, it's not as swift and easy to set up. And it wouldnt be limited to simply emulating the VCO-synths, but take them a couple steps further with increased mod possibilities.

I think they're shooting themselves in the foot big time on this one, for quite some time... I understand they were hoping to get rid of the bugs sooner, and that new bugs wouldn't pop up. At one time they were pretty quick with fixing bugs, a few here and there at least, rolling out a new OS once a month or so. That's until they just stopped, it seems. Sure, I expect them to roll out another OS eventually, but I'm afraid it too will have bugs, and that they'll ditch it after that update no matter what, by the looks of it. That's being hopeful they haven't done so already.

Just to clarify, when I mentioned a lot of folks having issues with MIDI loops, I didn't wasn't referring to your experiences in anyway -- it sounds like you've encountered some legitimate bugs, perhaps due to an older unit.  I wonder if Dave and crew would be willing to service or replace it for you?

FWIW, I too would like to see OSC fine tune as a mod destination, but I also look a the limitations of individual instruments (synths or otherwise) as inspiration for creativity.   A saxophone wouldn't be a sax if it could sound like a guitar.  The slop feature does add a voice detune, and gives us a dedicated knob to do it.  It doesn't sound exactly like a P6 or OB6 when we use it, and doesn't sound exactly like VCM characteristics, but the choice of features and how they are implemented is what gives a particular instrument its unique character, and lets a "connoisseur" of that tone distinguish it from other closely related instruments.  I know it's just one man's perspective but I love the that I can actually listen to certain string sounds made on the P6, Rev2, and OB6 and stand a pretty good chance of being able to know which is which without looking just by listening to the coloring of tone it produces.... 

Admittedly, I may be a little old school in this regard, about an instrument having it's own personality.  But I never liked "one size fits all" solutions to anything.  I do remember a time when I had less studio space and a much lower budget, and as a matter of pure economics, longed for an instrument that could do it all, so I don't for one moment fault anyone for wanting same.

[maxter]

The service needed would be an OS update in this case. The sequencer key-step mode not working like it should is universal, it seems, it's not just my unit.

"FWIW, I too would like to see OSC fine tune as a mod destination, but I also look a the limitations of individual instruments (synths or otherwise) as inspiration for creativity."
Same here with limitations, even minor flaws or quirks that can be interresting. Unfortunately this one isn't of that kind, at all. It has such potential, and it would be a shame to see it fall short. I mean there's certainly no hardware limitation in this case.

No, I don't like the "one size fits all" either, so that's not why I got the Rev2. It's just that I had a Prophet'08 that I was very happy with, which I liked for what it did and its character. I just wanted a couple more mod slots, as my more experimental patches used up everything pretty quickly. So I just wanted it to do what the Prophet'08 did, which it claimed to, plus the 4 extra mod-slots. Better osc-slop, sub-osc and more wave-shaping mods was extra icing on the cake, just the things I had additionally hoped for.

It's just that it's been out for about 3 years now... I don't expect it to be continually updated or flawless, but I think it's about time those bugs are fixed so it can at least do what the Prophet'08 can. With no updates for the last 18 months, I'm kind of fed up with "eagerly" waiting for it. Imagine. On second thought, don't.

I think you're a bit late to the party compared to some others here, as from the beginning there were just so many bugs. Even with new updates, they weren't always properly fixed, and new ones crept in. Doing update and calibration only to run into more bugs... Next OS, same... etc... ugh... So eventually I decided to let it rest until the bugs got sorted... ... ... ... ...

At least they used to roll out updates.

[LPF83]

I think you're a bit late to the party compared to some others here, as from the beginning there were just so many bugs. Even with new updates, they weren't always properly fixed, and new ones crept in. Doing update and calibration only to run into more bugs... Next OS, same... etc... ugh... So eventually I decided to let it rest until the bugs got sorted... ... ... ... ...
At least they used to roll out updates.

I don't disagree with that -- I am a relatively late buyer of both the Rev2 and OB-6 because other events and interests prevented synth hardware purchases for a few years there.  And I'm not sure what the differences in late models vs. early ones might be.  I've been holding off purchasing a P6 because I want to see what the next Sequential synth is going to be (supposedly not only announced but released in August).. not because I want to be an early adopter necessarily, I just want to have a reasonable 2-3 year plan in place.  I'm all to aware of how manufacturing variance in early models can cause issues, so I'm inclined to get a P6 first and wait and see on the new synth.  Although, I haven't heard too many complaints about the pro3 -- just not a huge monosynth guy and money/space/time and input preamps are limited resources. 

As a late buyer though, my impression of the Rev2 is a pretty solid piece of gear.  Then again I run all my hardware in ideal temp/humidity conditions.

[Jason]

I wish I had done likewise, and kept the Prophet '08.

I'm surprised to hear someone say this, especially given that you've discovered the magic of the VCM techniques developed by Creativespiral. His patches and templates have breathed new life into my Rev2 gear like nothing before it, and I don't think they would be possible on a Prophet '08. Although I now use Cubase for my recordings, I don't get too into the world of DAW's and soft synths; I'm definitely a hardware musician. I was among the first in line to get a Rev2. I don't know if I should read too much into the serial numbers, but mine is 2816-00029. Therefore, I have glitchy knobs on my keyboard version, which is slightly annoying. If it really bothered me, I'd get it fixed. I liked the bigger screen of the '08, but that is about it. When I first got the Rev2, I made various comparisons between it and an '08 until I was satisfied that they sounded the same. I then sold off the '08's and have never looked back.

[Sacred Synthesis]

I'm glad you've re-appeared, Jason.  Your opinions were missing from this discussion.

Have you updated your Rev2?

[Jason]

Thanks my Friend. I wasn't playing as much for a while there (I dislocated a pinky doing jiu jitsu, which didn't help) and was checking in to the forum even less. I've been playing a lot over the last several months (I also got a Yamaha Montage 8, which also gets a lot of attention.) Before posting again, I wanted to read through many of the posts that I missed, and I only recently got caught up.

Yes, I'm using the latest software in both units. Like other updates, it installed smoothly, and I have absolutely no complains about it. Back in December I was reading about the VCM techniques developed by Creativespiral and bought his patches. I'll probably write about this on his thread at some point, but I just love what he did! It's so clever, and it definitely gives me a lot more of the vintage feel than I ever had before. Another technique he uses a lot is hard panning, which is easy to do on the Rev2. So quite often, I have an individual patch hard panned via the stacked layers... and then I also pan again with my Rev2 module as I learned from you, which of course gives even more richness and depth. I find the results with all the panning combined with VCM more satisfying than anything I did before. I started using his templates to rework patches, and have done a lot of programming over the last several months. I have never been happier with my sounds! It is just one person's experience, but there is simply no comparison between the results that I'm getting now compared to when I was using the '08's.

As I said, I have one of the first keyboard units (serial #00029, and so I should probably get the glitchy knobs fixed. But I'm pretty used to it. When I start playing with the module, which knobs work beautifully (serial #00260), I'm reminded that I should get the keyboard knobs fixed. As you've heard me say before, I dislike the size of the Rev2 screen, which probably has a lot to do with my eyes. (I have a multi-focal lens in one eye, and so I see better than most people overall, but not at that particular distance). Any other differences I have adapted to, and I think you will too. If you're still on the fence, remember that a lot of stores give you a month to return an item. If you get the module first, it's easier to deal with shipping.

This isn't a great example, as it doesn't use any panning, and only one of the four Rev2 patches used incorporates VCM... and a lot of it is on the Montage... and it's not a style I usually play... But I did this two nights ago:

[Sacred Synthesis]

If you're still on the fence....

Oh, I'm on the fence, alright.  I've been waiting so long for this last update that I'm beginnig to look elsewhere.  Unlike yourself, perhaps, I've been totally pleased with the P'08 and wish I hadn't sold one.  My music recording has fallen away because I'm down to a minimal set up, and I'd like to get back in the game.