I stylized the Evolver wave shape chart

[ScottBrio]

I was sort of sick of looking at the black and white wave shape chart. I'm at my computer so much that everything needs to be in dark mode. Thought I'd share it here so you all can enjoy it too

Cheers!

[Sacred Synthesis]

Very nice.  In an attempt to stir up some renewed Poly Evolver enthusiasm, I had put together this page myself:

https://themusicalsynthesizer.wordpress.com/2017/07/13/evolver-resources/

And also:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL-CSFEgC2tTzYa70uOirGHIWGu72Pui8l

[ScottBrio]

Very nice.  In an attempt to stir up some renewed Poly Evolver enthusiasm, I had put together this page myself:

https://themusicalsynthesizer.wordpress.com/2017/07/13/evolver-resources/

And also:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL-CSFEgC2tTzYa70uOirGHIWGu72Pui8l

This is great! It's nice to have all that stuff in one spot, especially since most people don't realize there's more to read with Wayback Machine. I'm still working my way through the EX5Tech forum. There's a lot there but it's a bit laborious because I can't sign up to use the search function 😅

[Sacred Synthesis]

I'm still working my way through the EX5Tech forum. There's a lot there but it's a bit laborious because I can't sign up to use the search function 😅

I read through most or all of it a few years ago.  It was definitely enlightening.  First, it's refreshing the see all the enthusiasm, and second, it shows what an extraordinary instrument the Poly Evolver was at the time.  But now it's an entirely different synth world. 

I still remember fondly my original plan to have an all-Poly Evolver set up. 

[Soundquest]

These wave shapes are still pertinent today and cover most needs.  When I was new to PEK it was my first synth that had digital wave shapes in it.  I was reluctant to use them much at first as they lacked warmth in most cases.  I figured the PEK oscillators were just thin sounding.  It was later that I  learned that is thinness was more due a waveshape that starts to gravitate away from a saw shape losing its natural harmonics.  The Summit for example- I've been messing with lots of digital shapes lately.  They sound thinner in general, yet its produced from FPGA oscillators all that jazz.

  I really like the idea of being able to blend and morph waveshapes like  you can with the P12.  This allows a quite large palette from a small number of parent shapes.  This is perhaps the better approach than just having a large "wave library".   I say this because once you start getting above the 128 or so shapes (like found on PEK) it becomes somewhat redundant or cumbersome IMO.   Out of curiosity looked at some internet wave shapes banks. There's thousands of shapes!  Really.... I can't tell 'em apart.    I rather just have a hundred or so diverse parent shapes that I could  morph and blend.  Custom import is still nice for specific user shapes too of course.   But it needs to be easy to import, and ideally done w/o even a computer.

In summary,   would like to see the new Evolver (yeah, I'm counting on this from Sequential someday )  come with 128 onboard shapes (maybe the originals) that are morphable.  This is more useful  than even  a large "table" function.   Again, just my opinion.

[ScottBrio]

 I really like the idea of being able to blend and morph waveshapes like  you can with the P12.  This allows a quite large palette from a small number of parent shapes.  This is perhaps the better approach than just having a large "wave library".   I say this because once you start getting above the 128 or so shapes (like found on PEK) it becomes somewhat redundant or cumbersome IMO.   Out of curiosity looked at some internet wave shapes banks. There's thousands of shapes!  Really.... I can't tell 'em apart.    I rather just have a hundred or so diverse parent shapes that I could  morph and blend.  Custom import is still nice for specific user shapes too of course.   But it needs to be easy to import, and ideally done w/o even a computer.

I too find the waveshapes to be perfectly suitable for current modern sounds. They're very flexible and DSI originally set us up with a great range of waveshapes for any sound you might need. I'd be curious how much difference other waveshapes make.

You mentioned "morphing" waveshapes. How are you doing that? Shape Sequence or some other way?

[Sacred Synthesis]

You can fake waveshape morphing by modulating the oscillator levels back and forth.  On a different but related topic, doing the same between octaves gives a remarkable effect.

[ScottBrio]

You can fake waveshape morphing by modulating the oscillator levels back and forth.  On a different but related topic, doing the same between octaves gives a remarkable effect.

Fascinating- can you expand on how to do that a bit? Do you mean modulating the pulse width of the oscillators? Modulating "oscillator levels" for me just seems to modulate the volume of each oscillator.

doing the same between octaves gives a remarkable effect

Again, can you expand further on the specifics of how to do this?

Forgive my desire for specifics- it's a very is complex synth and I think for posterity at least, it would be great to have details. Also, I'll happily make a video on how to do it.

[Sacred Synthesis]

You can fake waveshape morphing by modulating the oscillator levels back and forth.  On a different but related topic, doing the same between octaves gives a remarkable effect.

Fascinating- can you expand on how to do that a bit? Do you mean modulating the pulse width of the oscillators? Modulating "oscillator levels" for me just seems to modulate the volume of each oscillator.

doing the same between octaves gives a remarkable effect

Again, can you expand further on the specifics of how to do this?

Forgive my desire for specifics- it's a very is complex synth and I think for posterity at least, it would be great to have details. Also, I'll happily make a video on how to do it.

The answer is the same in both cases: modulating the volume so that it shifts from one oscillator or octave to another.  Unfortunately, I only have a sample of the same technique on the Prophet '08.  It's hard to tell, but the bass in this piece has a certain "growl" to it, as it slowly modulates by an LFO between a 16' pitch and a 32'.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYWO2bX9C20&list=PL-CSFEgC2tTydFcvrBITryRPZHg4tUde5&index=14

[Soundquest]

ScottBrio,

Yes, what Sacred Synthesis is describing with varying the oscillators volume is how I would emulate some some waveshape variance.   The  Soundtower sequencer used to "vary" waveshapes is also very effective.     Note:  The pulse width function on the PEK only lets you apply that motion strictly to pulse waves. So that wont work.       In my original (oct 27) statement above I probably wasn't clear.  What I meant was the wave morphing ability that the P12 has would be nice to have on any future PEK remake.

[Sacred Synthesis]

I've started a new thread to demonstrate vector synthesis on the Poly Evolver.  Just a beginning:

https://forum.sequential.com/index.php/topic,4794.new.html#new

The key to making the effect worthwhile is in finding two very distinct sounding digital waveshapes, so that the changes between them are pronounced. 

[proteus-ix]

I've started a new thread to demonstrate vector synthesis on the Poly Evolver.  Just a beginning:

https://forum.sequential.com/index.php/topic,4794.new.html#new

The key to making the effect worthwhile is in finding two very distinct sounding digital waveshapes, so that the changes between them are pronounced.

But is this really vector synthesis?  AFAIK, VS implies morphing between waveshapes such that an intermediate point is producing an average of the 2 waves; the technique on the PEK seems more like just simple crossfading, even if we're doing so with the original VS waves.

Or am I missing something that the PE can do?

[Sacred Synthesis]

No, you're right; it's nothing but fading from one wave shape into another.  The PEK cannot do vector synthesis, so I attempted to do a poor imitation of it.

[proteus-ix]

No, you're right; it's nothing but fading from one wave shape into another.  The PEK cannot do vector synthesis, so I attempted to do a poor imitation of it.

No worries, now you got me thinking... if there was a way to assign the mod wheel to Osc3 positively and Osc4 negatively, you could use it to crossfade...  But AFAIK the mod wheel only goes positive from the start position?

That said, you could also maybe assign one to aftertouch, or use a pedal... to give more expressive control than just LFO; although I guess you could assign the LFOs to the mod wheel too...  I'll try this tomorrow. 

[chysn]

AFAIK, VS implies morphing between waveshapes such that an intermediate point is producing an average of the 2 waves; the technique on the PEK seems more like just simple crossfading, even if we're doing so with the original VS waves.

Sacred Synthesis had it right; Vector Synthesis is cross-fading, not morphing, at least in the VS/Wavestation/SY implementations. You hear all four oscillators at once, but at levels that vary over time. It can be emulated with two multisegment time/level envelope generators controlling complementary levels for two pairs of oscillators.

The thing that's not so easy to reproduce is that VS uses a polar plane and not a Cartesian one. You're mixing in a circle, so some combinations (like -1, -1) aren't allowed. That would be a tough constraint to pull off with a pair of EGs (or controllers). But if you successfully play it by ear, nobody will likely notice.

[proteus-ix]

AFAIK, VS implies morphing between waveshapes such that an intermediate point is producing an average of the 2 waves; the technique on the PEK seems more like just simple crossfading, even if we're doing so with the original VS waves.

Sacred Synthesis had it right; Vector Synthesis is cross-fading, not morphing, at least in the VS/Wavestation/SY implementations. You hear all four oscillators at once, but at levels that vary over time. It can be emulated with two multisegment time/level envelope generators controlling complementary levels for two pairs of oscillators.

The thing that's not so easy to reproduce is that VS uses a polar plane and not a Cartesian one. You're mixing in a circle, so some combinations (like -1, -1) aren't allowed. That would be a tough constraint to pull off with a pair of EGs (or controllers). But if you successfully play it by ear, nobody will likely notice.

Yeah, after I checked the manual I see that it is just amp crossfading, not actual wave morphing.  I guess I had been confused by software implementations of XY wave morphing, which obviously take advantage of modern processing power that Dave could only dream of in the VS days.