Lobo's Gear Rant Thread

[LoboLives]

With the announcement of Oberheim's return, I do wonder if we might see the Two Voice Pro return as well. Perhaps even Tom's SonOfFourVoice concept. I would really hate for this all just to be for an OBX/a reissue and be done with it.

Should a TVS Pro or SO4V come to fruition....I might have to rethink my idea of getting a Pro 3 over the dual ARP Odyssey. It's super tempting but at the same time I'm hesitant.

I've wondered about this as well -- since Tom doesn't seem to be mentioning even the possibility of taking orders for the Two Voice on his site, it makes one think that maybe Focusrite is swallowing up the brand altogether and maybe making both the TVS and OBX/a (and perhaps other reissues) available.  Matrix 12 please.

This is why I think Focusrite is going to regulate Oberheim and Sequential to their "Golden Oldies" department while having Novation handle all the forward thinking and innovative synths. Shame really, even Tom said he wanted to do an updated version of the SEM and I was really hoping to see a VCO/Wavetable poly from Sequential but I think we are stuck with reissues. Not my bag but there's a market for it. Many people bought the Rossum SP1200 reissue over the ISLA S2400 just based on brand name alone and didn't even look at features or listened to any demos.

I wouldn’t necessarily see that as a bad thing.  A Matrix 12 done in the same way Dave re-did the Prophet 5/10? Yes, please!   Some things just don’t need “improvements”… my humble 2¢

For sure. I just think it would be a waste of a brand to rely on “greatest hits” because there’s no longevity in that. Even Fender experiment with locking tuners, noiseless pickups, different shape necks etc. If they just stuck with V shaped necks and vintage hardware I’m sure it would cut a substantial portion of their customers

[Sacred Synthesis]

There's more to the re-issue fervor than merely nostalgia or the cheap thrill of owning an old classic synthesizer.  There's also the desire to work with a simpler instrument free of menus and that allows a 100% direct experience of designing sounds and making music.  It's the pleasure of dwelling for a whole session on the fundamentals of analog synthesis - which are rather basic; but that's where all the magic is.  Some of us just don't need or want a plethora of features and even find them distracting; they also make a control panel annoyingly crowded.  Personally, I don't care whether a synthesizer is a re-issued vintage or a brand-new design.  But there certainly aren't many modern keyboard synthesizers that fit the above description, so the natural tendency is to look to the re-issues.  For example, I would love to find the modern equivalent of something like a Roland SH-02, but with a four or five-octave keyboard.  What a pleasure it would be to work with such a clean basic spacious panel.  But there's no keyboard synthesizer available that comes even close.  So, people like me end up looking to the re-issues.  That's not nostalgia, it's a love of simplicity and directness in synthesis.

[LoboLives]

There's more to the re-issue fervor than merely nostalgia or the cheap thrill of owning an old classic synthesizer.  There's also the desire to work with a simpler instrument free of menus and that allows a 100% direct experience of designing sounds and making music.  It's the pleasure of dwelling for a whole session on the fundamentals of analog synthesis - which are rather basic; but that's where all the magic is.  Some of us just don't need or want a plethora of features and even find them distracting; they also make a control panel annoyingly crowded.  Personally, I don't care whether a synthesizer is a re-issued vintage or a brand-new design.  But there certainly aren't many modern keyboard synthesizers that fit the above description, so the natural tendency is to look to the re-issues.  For example, I would love to find the modern equivalent of something like a Roland SH-02, but with a four or five-octave keyboard.  What a pleasure it would be to work with such a clean basic spacious panel.  But there's no keyboard synthesizer available that comes even close.  So, people like me end up looking to the re-issues.  That's not nostalgia, it's a love of simplicity and directness in synthesis.

I understand all that, I just don’t believe it’s the case for most reissue buyers 90% of the time. As long as the buyers are honest with themselves and others why they enjoy the instrument then I have no problem. It’s when people try and preach or try and convince others is when I take an issue. Don’t tell me something “sounds better” when you also get a blind comparison test wrong and then proclaim the test was somehow rigged.

[Sacred Synthesis]

There's more to the re-issue fervor than merely nostalgia or the cheap thrill of owning an old classic synthesizer.  There's also the desire to work with a simpler instrument free of menus and that allows a 100% direct experience of designing sounds and making music.  It's the pleasure of dwelling for a whole session on the fundamentals of analog synthesis - which are rather basic; but that's where all the magic is.  Some of us just don't need or want a plethora of features and even find them distracting; they also make a control panel annoyingly crowded.  Personally, I don't care whether a synthesizer is a re-issued vintage or a brand-new design.  But there certainly aren't many modern keyboard synthesizers that fit the above description, so the natural tendency is to look to the re-issues.  For example, I would love to find the modern equivalent of something like a Roland SH-02, but with a four or five-octave keyboard.  What a pleasure it would be to work with such a clean basic spacious panel.  But there's no keyboard synthesizer available that comes even close.  So, people like me end up looking to the re-issues.  That's not nostalgia, it's a love of simplicity and directness in synthesis.

I understand all that, I just don’t believe it’s the case for most reissue buyers 90% of the time. As long as the buyers are honest with themselves and others why they enjoy the instrument then I have no problem. It’s when people try and preach or try and convince others is when I take an issue. Don’t tell me something “sounds better” when you also get a blind comparison test wrong and then proclaim the test was somehow rigged.

I agree.  I couldn't care less about the whole blind test business.  This has become almost a sport, with purists cheering from the bleachers and their opponents cursing back.  But there's no need for all the heated blather.  Throw all of it aside and just think and talk synthesis. 

We all have our preferences.  My preference is for simple analog with long keyboards, and I make no apologies for it.  But what options are there for such a taste, other than the re-issues?  And actually, I haven't found even a re-issue that fits my interests.  The Korg ARP 2600 FS came the closest.  But..um...$!

[Shaw]

There's more to the re-issue fervor than merely nostalgia or the cheap thrill of owning an old classic synthesizer.  There's also the desire to work with a simpler instrument free of menus and that allows a 100% direct experience of designing sounds and making music.  It's the pleasure of dwelling for a whole session on the fundamentals of analog synthesis - which are rather basic; but that's where all the magic is.  Some of us just don't need or want a plethora of features and even find them distracting; they also make a control panel annoyingly crowded.  Personally, I don't care whether a synthesizer is a re-issued vintage or a brand-new design.  But there certainly aren't many modern keyboard synthesizers that fit the above description, so the natural tendency is to look to the re-issues.  For example, I would love to find the modern equivalent of something like a Roland SH-02, but with a four or five-octave keyboard.  What a pleasure it would be to work with such a clean basic spacious panel.  But there's no keyboard synthesizer available that comes even close.  So, people like me end up looking to the re-issues.  That's not nostalgia, it's a love of simplicity and directness in synthesis.

This is why I’m so attracted to the Waldorf Quantum. It has some traditional simplicity in the architecture (anyone who has ever spent any real time on a synth can get on with it quite quickly)… but it also pushes the envelope in some new directions (mixing kernel synthesis and granular / samples with VA and wavetables).


The Quantum has menus, of course. But the presentation of the menus is unobtrusive and complements an already familiar design.  Moog did the same thing with the Moog One. “Geniusly Simple” integration in my opinion.

[Shaw]

There's more to the re-issue fervor than merely nostalgia or the cheap thrill of owning an old classic synthesizer.  There's also the desire to work with a simpler instrument free of menus and that allows a 100% direct experience of designing sounds and making music.  It's the pleasure of dwelling for a whole session on the fundamentals of analog synthesis - which are rather basic; but that's where all the magic is.  Some of us just don't need or want a plethora of features and even find them distracting; they also make a control panel annoyingly crowded.  Personally, I don't care whether a synthesizer is a re-issued vintage or a brand-new design.  But there certainly aren't many modern keyboard synthesizers that fit the above description, so the natural tendency is to look to the re-issues.  For example, I would love to find the modern equivalent of something like a Roland SH-02, but with a four or five-octave keyboard.  What a pleasure it would be to work with such a clean basic spacious panel.  But there's no keyboard synthesizer available that comes even close.  So, people like me end up looking to the re-issues.  That's not nostalgia, it's a love of simplicity and directness in synthesis.

I understand all that, I just don’t believe it’s the case for most reissue buyers 90% of the time. As long as the buyers are honest with themselves and others why they enjoy the instrument then I have no problem. It’s when people try and preach or try and convince others is when I take an issue. Don’t tell me something “sounds better” when you also get a blind comparison test wrong and then proclaim the test was somehow rigged.

Yeah, you’re right… “blind tests” and “sounds better” don’t really end up being helpful at the end of the day (to me at least).  A large part of my personal pleasure comes from not just the sound of the instrument, but my experience in creating with it.

[LoboLives]

There's more to the re-issue fervor than merely nostalgia or the cheap thrill of owning an old classic synthesizer.  There's also the desire to work with a simpler instrument free of menus and that allows a 100% direct experience of designing sounds and making music.  It's the pleasure of dwelling for a whole session on the fundamentals of analog synthesis - which are rather basic; but that's where all the magic is.  Some of us just don't need or want a plethora of features and even find them distracting; they also make a control panel annoyingly crowded.  Personally, I don't care whether a synthesizer is a re-issued vintage or a brand-new design.  But there certainly aren't many modern keyboard synthesizers that fit the above description, so the natural tendency is to look to the re-issues.  For example, I would love to find the modern equivalent of something like a Roland SH-02, but with a four or five-octave keyboard.  What a pleasure it would be to work with such a clean basic spacious panel.  But there's no keyboard synthesizer available that comes even close.  So, people like me end up looking to the re-issues.  That's not nostalgia, it's a love of simplicity and directness in synthesis.

This is why I’m so attracted to the Waldorf Quantum. It has some traditional simplicity in the architecture (anyone who has ever spent any real time on a synth can get on with it quite quickly)… but it also pushes the envelope in some new directions (mixing kernel synthesis and granular / samples with VA and wavetables).


The Quantum has menus, of course. But the presentation of the menus is unobtrusive and complements an already familiar design.  Moog did the same thing with the Moog One. “Geniusly Simple” integration in my opinion.

I was really put off by the UNO Synth Pro’s matrix design but after watching Marc Doty’s videos he said it’s incredibly simple to use and once you get used to it, navigating is a breeze. It’s a 70s Style Italian synth but intelligently updated. I feel the same about the Quantum now. The only thing I dislike about the Quantum is the lack of multitimbrality whereas the PPG Wave had 10 part multitimbrality.

[LoboLives]

There's more to the re-issue fervor than merely nostalgia or the cheap thrill of owning an old classic synthesizer.  There's also the desire to work with a simpler instrument free of menus and that allows a 100% direct experience of designing sounds and making music.  It's the pleasure of dwelling for a whole session on the fundamentals of analog synthesis - which are rather basic; but that's where all the magic is.  Some of us just don't need or want a plethora of features and even find them distracting; they also make a control panel annoyingly crowded.  Personally, I don't care whether a synthesizer is a re-issued vintage or a brand-new design.  But there certainly aren't many modern keyboard synthesizers that fit the above description, so the natural tendency is to look to the re-issues.  For example, I would love to find the modern equivalent of something like a Roland SH-02, but with a four or five-octave keyboard.  What a pleasure it would be to work with such a clean basic spacious panel.  But there's no keyboard synthesizer available that comes even close.  So, people like me end up looking to the re-issues.  That's not nostalgia, it's a love of simplicity and directness in synthesis.

I understand all that, I just don’t believe it’s the case for most reissue buyers 90% of the time. As long as the buyers are honest with themselves and others why they enjoy the instrument then I have no problem. It’s when people try and preach or try and convince others is when I take an issue. Don’t tell me something “sounds better” when you also get a blind comparison test wrong and then proclaim the test was somehow rigged.

Yeah, you’re right… “blind tests” and “sounds better” don’t really end up being helpful at the end of the day (to me at least).  A large part of my personal pleasure comes from not just the sound of the instrument, but my experience in creating with it.

At this point I’m really conflicted about again looking into getting synths without preset memory. Even if it doesn’t take that long to set a patch up, if I have a melody or something in my head, stopping to manually program a patch is going to be problematic.

I’m at a point where I’m like, do I go for the Pro 3 and get a kick ass monosynth, paraphonic synth, with effects and an incredibly advanced sequencer plus a Wavetable oscillator or do I do my original idea for the dual ARPs simply based on trying to mimic Carpenter’s setup.

[Sacred Synthesis]

At this point I’m really conflicted about again looking into getting synths without preset memory. Even if it doesn’t take that long to set a patch up, if I have a melody or something in my head, stopping to manually program a patch is going to be problematic.

I’m at a point where I’m like, do I go for the Pro 3 and get a kick ass monosynth, paraphonic synth, with effects and an incredibly advanced sequencer plus a Wavetable oscillator or do I do my original idea for the dual ARPs simply based on trying to mimic Carpenter’s setup.

After everything you've said here and elsewhere, how can you be conflicted?  It seems clear as a digital bell to me that the Pro 3 is the right choice for you.  Why limit yourself to the imitation of one guy's music?  Besides, you can do both by using the Pro 3 as a controller of two modules.

[LoboLives]

I'm also looking at another sampler as well. Debating between the 1010Music Blackbox and the Tasty Chips-GR-1. They are completely different instruments and I'm mostly going to be loading EMU and Prophet 2000 samples in there.

I was considering the Pioneer SP-16 but I don't think you can play the samples polyphonically

[LoboLives]

You know with Dave's untimely passing, I might have to reconsider my thoughts on my set up after all and my thoughts towards reissues in general.

I just have to really decide if I'm basing my setup on practicality or on ego and would my OCD put me into a steep rabbit hole of wasting time chasing a dragon as opposed to composing/recording.

It's like constantly collecting records or movies but never actually taking the time to listen to/watch them all because you are always in hunting mode.

[chysn]

You know with Dave's untimely passing, I might have to reconsider my thoughts on my set up after all and my thoughts towards reissues in general.

How does Dave's passing affect that?

[LoboLives]

You know with Dave's untimely passing, I might have to reconsider my thoughts on my set up after all and my thoughts towards reissues in general.

How does Dave's passing affect that?

I know it sounds odd, and it's completely selfish of me to say so, but my late father was a huge fan of Dave Smith. He owned a Prophet 5 Rev 2 and after I saved up my money I got the Prophet 6 he was driving us back from the store and said "Ev, I'm going to tell you something, you have an instrument in your hands made by a man with integrity and passion and brilliance. It's not some cheap toy made in China or some plastic light bright shit that Akai or Roland are coming out with, this is a work of art." When we got home he sat with me and we went through the sounds and he was telling me about how he used similar sounds on his music and would play me tracks. And the Prophet X of course is a story in itself, I lost my job right after it was released and my father went out and bought it for me and we sat together on it for hours.

I know that if he were still around, we would have a Prophet 5 and OBX8 and he would be happy as a clam jamming away.

Dave Smith helped my father and I come closer together in a sense after many strained years. I know it sounds weird, but losing Dave feels like I've lost a memory of my father in a weird way. I dunno, maybe I'm dumb in saying that but it really has knocked the wind out of me.

[chysn]

Yeah, that's a good memory, and worth safeguarding. But it sounds like you might want to wait until the initial shock wears off before deciding on the direction of your studio.

[Sacred Synthesis]

You know with Dave's untimely passing, I might have to reconsider my thoughts on my set up after all and my thoughts towards reissues in general.

How does Dave's passing affect that?

I know it sounds odd, and it's completely selfish of me to say so, but my late father was a huge fan of Dave Smith. He owned a Prophet 5 Rev 2 and after I saved up my money I got the Prophet 6 he was driving us back from the store and said "Ev, I'm going to tell you something, you have an instrument in your hands made by a man with integrity and passion and brilliance. It's not some cheap toy made in China or some plastic light bright shit that Akai or Roland are coming out with, this is a work of art." When we got home he sat with me and we went through the sounds and he was telling me about how he used similar sounds on his music and would play me tracks. And the Prophet X of course is a story in itself, I lost my job right after it was released and my father went out and bought it for me and we sat together on it for hours.

I know that if he were still around, we would have a Prophet 5 and OBX8 and he would be happy as a clam jamming away.

Dave Smith helped my father and I come closer together in a sense after many strained years. I know it sounds weird, but losing Dave feels like I've lost a memory of my father in a weird way. I dunno, maybe I'm dumb in saying that but it really has knocked the wind out of me.

Those are precious and noble thoughts about your father.  It seems as if the beauty and power of music helped to bring about a bit of a reconciliation between the two of you.

We're all feeling a bit winded right now, even several days after the news.  I just had a fabulous hike through the local mountains; deep in the woods without seeing or hearing a single person for hours, and with my lunch on by back.  It's as good as life gets for me.  And yet, I still felt depressed thinking about Dave's death.

[LoboLives]

Yeah, that's a good memory, and worth safeguarding. But it sounds like you might want to wait until the initial shock wears off before deciding on the direction of your studio.

I guess another fear I have is for Sequential itself. What will become of the brand now that it's head figure is no longer with us and now that it's owned by a conglomerate. Could very well see "Made In China" on future synths or everything be merged into Novation or something. Dave said in one of his last interviews "Focusrite asked us 'What's your forecast' and we were like, we don't really have one. Cause we don't, it's just "what do we want to do next? It's more fun that way." But now that Dave isn't with us anymore, I can't see Focusrite accepting that as an answer. Obviously too early to have any basis for that but I still feel an urge to "Get it while it's still hot" out of fear of an uncertain future.

I know a new synth was scheduled for later this year....and I know it will be the last thing Dave's touch had.....I'm hopefully it's a VCO/Wavetable poly synth like a new Evolver....how poetic that would be that his last synth is the evolution (no pun intended) of one that helped him get back into hardware synths and form DSI.

But I don't even know if that's going to happen at all. Everything might be (and should be ) paused for Sequential for the foreseeable future.

[jg666]

In my humble opinion, I thought at the time that Dave oversaw the Focusrite deal with a mind to his future retirement so he would have done that with the future of sequential in mind. I also imagine that a lot of Dave's knowledge and ideas etc have been shared around amongst the existing Sequential staff.

Like has been said above, I fully understand your feelings at the moment, but it's a good thing to wait and see what progresses over the coming year or so.

[jg666]

Only just noticed that there's another Dave thread on these forums where people have said roughly what I've said above so apologies for that. I suppose it shows that more than one of us has the same thoughts about the Focusrite deal though

[Elric]

Yea, I'm not completely happy with my Pro 3.
Software/pots need(s) a LOT of help.
(Cheers Dave [RIP!] for the design and awesome Tone!! - But MAN is this thing is pissing me off!)

Please, Focusrite, re-write all software from the ground up!
Version 2.0! (The Pro 3 is already amazing, and could be the best mono synth ever created with the right OS update!)