Rev 2 firmware is it just me?

[creativespiral]

That describes it very good, Creative Spiral. Just out of interest: what happens to the sequencer of layer B? Is it mocked up, too, or does it work fine, when running simultaneosly? What about Split mode? Is the bug there, too?

Good questions.   

1. Yes, Layer B is mucked up as well when they are stacked like this.  Skips a bunch of steps.   

2. Just tested and in Split mode it works as intended.   

It definitely seems that the issue is just that in Stack Mode, the "Key Steps" need to be calculated on a per layer basis.      (I just was playing around with different settings, and interestingly, when unison is enabled on a layer and the voice never advanced on the layer, then it doesn't mess up the other layer... which, I suppose makes sense for my interpretation of this bug logic...  so I'm guessing the fix logic needs to be either:

a. Only count voice advancement on the current layer as a key step for that layer

OR

b. If the above holistic fix is hard to accomplish (ie: per layer voice counting), create some basic IF/THEN logic that says
IF Stacked = True
AND Layer-A-Unison = Off
AND Layer-B-Unison = Off
THEN 
Divide/2 for Voice Advancement Key Stepping

[jok3r]

I don‘t have my Rev2 here, because it‘s sitting in a rehearsal room right now, so I can‘t try it myself. I have another question:

What about „Reset“ steps… are they skipped, too, and would that mean, that the sequence is running through all 16, or in this case 8 steps everytime?

[creativespiral]

I don‘t have my Rev2 here, because it‘s sitting in a rehearsal room right now, so I can‘t try it myself. I have another question:

What about „Reset“ steps… are they skipped, too, and would that mean, that the sequence is running through all 16, or in this case 8 steps everytime?

The Reset Steps are obeyed, but key stepping still skips steps as outlined in the video... it actually becomes very difficult to keep track of when the reset results in an odd number of steps being left playing.   I think the one fix that I outlined will make Key Stepping work great though... and it seems like its probably pretty straightforward to patch... at least from an outsider perspective.


There is a separate issue with the NO RESET and NO HOLD/RST modes of the mod sequencer... (Getting either Out of Phase issues / partial note abrupt changes, or Inconsistent Results when played along with DAW or drum machine)   Razmo originally documented them a couple years back in the FW 1.1.5.9 bug thread...  I have run into the issues several times over the years... but have never spent enough time to fully dissect what's going on.   

I'm going to spend a bit of time in the next day or two and try to document the other Gated Seq issue as well as possible.  Will upload a video or write up some detailed info soon.   

[rhullings]

Creative Spiral's bug is #1 on my list.

But man if they could make the arpeggiator clock/work like every other arpeggiator I know I'd be so happy. Probably an added feature. Kinda in the gray area though.

Anybody see the new Digitakt firmware update? That's how you do firmware updates, even after a co says the hardware is maxed out.

[redgroup]

Creative Spiral's bug is #1 on my list.

But man if they could make the arpeggiator clock/work like every other arpeggiator I know I'd be so happy. Probably an added feature. Kinda in the gray area though.

Anybody see the new Digitakt firmware update? That's how you do firmware updates, even after a co says the hardware is maxed out.

Elektron might have its flaws (particularly in regards to overbridge) but the stability of the synths/their interest in keeping those existing models running awesomely are a gold standard to me.

On the plus side I'll be selling my prophet Rev 2 sometime this weekend. Definetly the last time I bother buying anything from Sequential/DSI.

[creativespiral]

Creative Spiral's bug is #1 on my list.

But man if they could make the arpeggiator clock/work like every other arpeggiator I know I'd be so happy. Probably an added feature. Kinda in the gray area though.

Anybody see the new Digitakt firmware update? That's how you do firmware updates, even after a co says the hardware is maxed out.

@rhullings - can you elaborate a bit further on the specific Arpeggiator behavior you are referring to?    I am doing some testing on the gated sequencer, and there is definitely an issue with the "no reset" modes in regards to clock timing and being able to work with either a DAW or Drum Machine...  I'm wondering if that is the same issue you are referring to?   Using arp with the gated sequencer in a "no reset" or "no hold/rst" mode?     

Or are you referring to a separate issue with the Arp / clock?   If so, please document the circumstances / steps to reproduce... or at least describe the general issue and what behavior you are expecting vs what is output by synth, and I'll do some testing to see if I can confirm it and lock down the source.

@redgroup - I don't think there are that many bugs left in Rev2 .. hopefully if they do one more FW update then the remaining bugs can be ironed out.   Do you have any specific bugs you can report here?   If we can just get everything documented well, that will make it more straightforward to patch any existing issues.

[Kasimir Effekt]

It's great that customers' needs seem to be noticed through this forum. I really hope Sequential will release a final version of the firmware!
Not sure if it has already been described, however:

- mod matrix still has the problem that the modwheel can not be assigned immediately via the source shortcut. you have to assign a different source first before the modwheel will get recognized.

- BBD-Delay with clock sync on: modulation of parameter 1 (time) is not working.

- Maybe not a bug, but unexpected behaviour:
according to the manual you have to chose between gated seq and poly seq – BUT: when you're in stacked mode, you can use gated sequencer on layer B AND start poly seq on this layer. (e.g. you're able to sequence creativespirals VCM-patches)
For me, it's a quiet useful feature

[Sacred Synthesis]

We'll add it to the list.  Thank you.

[rhullings]

Sorry to drop off - I really only infrequently pop in here anymore to see if there's a new version of the firmware.

As for my arp note, I am indeed talking about how the arp and more generally the clock works when slaved to a DAW or sequencer. I've talked to Sequential support about this and they've confirmed that the clock will only lock to the beat of an incoming midi signal when it receives a "MIDI START" message. Any other message and it'll run at the correct tempo, but not in sync with the beat. Ultimately this makes the arp and LFOs useless when controlling the rev2 from an external source that doesn't send MIDI START messages on playback, especially if you not only want beat sync to work but also if you want repeatable performances. Like punching into a track in Pro Tools for example.

[consequential]

We'll add it to the list.  Thank you.

I appreciate, admire and commend the collective effort by forum members to make sure all the important bugs have been listed.

At the same time, there is evidently something quite surrealistic to it, especially at such a late stage in the history of the product.
 
If it is not evident to Sequential itself, it must certainly be to prospective customers who are considering buying ANY product from Sequential - not to speak of a Prophet Rev2 - and read this thread or learn about its main thrust on social media.

[maxter]

I appreciate, admire and commend the collective effort by forum members to make sure all the important bugs have been listed.

At the same time, there is evidently something quite surrealistic to it, especially at such a late stage in the history of the product.
 
If it is not evident to Sequential itself, it must certainly be to prospective customers who are considering buying ANY product from Sequential - not to speak of a Prophet Rev2 - and read this thread or learn about its main thrust on social media.

I agree, I'm really thankful for the efforts made by other forum members here. creativespiral is pretty much working without pay for SCI... Not to mention his thorough work with VCM, analyzing what makes synths sound "vintage", which SCI then casually implemented on other synths, replacing slop, and calling it "vintage" mode... 

"At the same time, there is evidently something quite surrealistic to it, especially at such a late stage in the history of the product." I feel that too... not getting my hopes up this time, I still fear it'll end in a crazy-Greta quote "You have stolen my dreams... with your empty words."    I hope not, but considering how many times the update has been "coming soon" previously (which turned out to be empty words indeed), my impression is that it could be just empty words to ease the minds of forum members, and consequently lessen the critique of the Rev2 (for now), damage controlling the bad rep... until they've sold out the Rev2's left in stock, then comes a lame excuse like "we tried, but it was just impossible to fix..." 

I'm quite concerned that this may be the case, that they've already decided on it, and simply feed us "empty words"... Which would be even more waste of Rev2-owners time, putting in time to document the bugs and so, and in creativespirals case, even doing much of the work for them... At this stage, I wouldn't be surprised at all, if it's just "for show", to "keep face". I'm generally not pessimistic by nature, but when it comes to this, I'm sorry to say I have little, if any, hope in SCI. I predict the update will never come. Please prove me wrong, SCI!

"If it is not evident to Sequential itself, it must certainly be to prospective customers who are considering buying ANY product from Sequential - not to speak of a Prophet Rev2 - and read this thread or learn about its main thrust on social media."

Yep, that's what I'm afraid they're just trying to tone down, until they've sold the remaining Rev2s... and that THIS is the purpose of getting vocal on the forum, hinting an update may come (again), to calm us down 'til then. "Please list the bugs" to bring us hope... (as if the bugs weren't already on the bug thread, that they apparently don't read...?)  I sincerely hope not, but most of my impressions about this whole thing throughout the years have turned out to be right, unfortunately... I appreciate Pym chiming in here, but my impression was that he said a WHOLE LOT, excuses and all, without saying anything concrete AT ALL... I got an odd, eerie vibe from that.

Again, not trying to be pessimistic, I REALLY want to believe that they're even trying, but it's the total opposite of what my gut is telling me.

Again, SCI, PLEASE prove me wrong!

[maxter]

Not my intention to be a party pooper... there's just too much "strange" going on with this, for me to believe the excuses and "explanations". I assume the covid excuse was more convenient than true. But prior to that one, we were supposed to think that they've been working on an update for years... "just wait a little longer, it'll be here soon" repeatedly, would imply they were actually working on it, wouldn't it...? then all of a sudden "oops, we just realized there was no space left for updates"... to "ok, we'll have a look at it... oh, btw, what bugs were we supposed to have been trying to fix, all this time, again?" I mean, if they didn't even keep a log of the bugs, wth were they trying to fix these previous years?

The impression I get from this, and the rest of it, is that SCI are not genuine in their communications with their customers... I don't want to accuse them of straight out LYING, but it's getting pretty hard to explain away now, isn't it?

Shitty behaviour, or making mistakes, is one thing. But not owning up to it, pretending stuff, lying, is something else...

Some forum members here have asked to be told what's going on, straight up... like, either way, just TELL US! (preferably years ago)... why? Because SCI have been anything but transparent on this one, pretending to be working on an update, and up until lately, hardly even communicating directly with their Rev2 customers on this issue on here.

Sorry for blasting SCI, I really wish the situation was different, but I had to get this off my chest.

[jg666]

There's an article on the BBC News site today saying that 'Customers are fed up with Covid excuse for bad service' and it's what I'm hearing from a lot of people.

I was very disappointed to see that when the Prophet-5 was released, there was a problem with the manufacturing process initially and it was deemed acceptable that customers fix the issue themselves by opening up their new and expensive synths. You shouldn't expect to have to do that for any purchase in my opinion. This combined with the already long wait for the next firmware release made me think that it would never happen.

[CPN37]

I don't know, speaking personally I can put up with the odd glitch in the process considering this is a small company with innovation and enthusiasm at it's heart. It's never going to be perfect and run like a huge organisation like Yamaha or some other entity which has gotten so big its lost its humanity along with its human error in the transition to the well oiled mega business, and if Sequential ever did go that way you'd probably be nostalgic for the current era!

Of course these are premium instruments and as a customer you have shelled out a lot of money, but I dunno I think considering its a small firm creating instruments out of enthusiasm first and foremost, I would cut Sequential some slack. Or at least, more slack than you would cut bloody Deutsche Bank or something 😄

[Tugdual]

Not my intention to be a party pooper... there's just too much "strange" going on with this, for me to believe the excuses and "explanations". I assume the covid excuse was more convenient than true. But prior to that one, we were supposed to think that they've been working on an update for years... "just wait a little longer, it'll be here soon" repeatedly, would imply they were actually working on it, wouldn't it...? then all of a sudden "oops, we just realized there was no space left for updates"... to "ok, we'll have a look at it... oh, btw, what bugs were we supposed to have been trying to fix, all this time, again?" I mean, if they didn't even keep a log of the bugs, wth were they trying to fix these previous years?

The impression I get from this, and the rest of it, is that SCI are not genuine in their communications with their customers... I don't want to accuse them of straight out LYING, but it's getting pretty hard to explain away now, isn't it?

Shitty behaviour, or making mistakes, is one thing. But not owning up to it, pretending stuff, lying, is something else...

Some forum members here have asked to be told what's going on, straight up... like, either way, just TELL US! (preferably years ago)... why? Because SCI have been anything but transparent on this one, pretending to be working on an update, and up until lately, hardly even communicating directly with their Rev2 customers on this issue on here.

Sorry for blasting SCI, I really wish the situation was different, but I had to get this off my chest.

I don’t think it is a communication issue, I think it is amateurism.
And this makes me feel very sad cuz I was extremely proud to buy a “Prophet” as my first hardware synth I felt in communion with electronic music history. Really… Now I take the measure off how badly the brand image has deteriorated. Maybe the idiot was me and my beliefs, no need to blame DSI, yes my rev2 is a DSI. Interestingly it became Sequential soon after, like DS is taking his distances, and huh btw, we’re talking about Focusrite now, aren’t we? Sounds like the end, beautiful friends.

[CPN37]

Not my intention to be a party pooper... there's just too much "strange" going on with this, for me to believe the excuses and "explanations". I assume the covid excuse was more convenient than true. But prior to that one, we were supposed to think that they've been working on an update for years... "just wait a little longer, it'll be here soon" repeatedly, would imply they were actually working on it, wouldn't it...? then all of a sudden "oops, we just realized there was no space left for updates"... to "ok, we'll have a look at it... oh, btw, what bugs were we supposed to have been trying to fix, all this time, again?" I mean, if they didn't even keep a log of the bugs, wth were they trying to fix these previous years?

The impression I get from this, and the rest of it, is that SCI are not genuine in their communications with their customers... I don't want to accuse them of straight out LYING, but it's getting pretty hard to explain away now, isn't it?

Shitty behaviour, or making mistakes, is one thing. But not owning up to it, pretending stuff, lying, is something else...

Some forum members here have asked to be told what's going on, straight up... like, either way, just TELL US! (preferably years ago)... why? Because SCI have been anything but transparent on this one, pretending to be working on an update, and up until lately, hardly even communicating directly with their Rev2 customers on this issue on here.

Sorry for blasting SCI, I really wish the situation was different, but I had to get this off my chest.

I don’t think it is a communication issue, I think it is amateurism.
And this makes me feel very sad cuz I was extremely proud to buy a “Prophet” as my first hardware synth I felt in communion with electronic music history. Really… Now I take the measure off how badly the brand image has deteriorated. Maybe the idiot was me and my beliefs, no need to blame DSI, yes my rev2 is a DSI. Interestingly it became Sequential soon after, like DS is taking his distances, and huh btw, we’re talking about Focusrite now, aren’t we? Sounds like the end, beautiful friends.

Well if you are worried about the brand image deteriorating you probably weren't there in 1978 when you might have bought an overheating Prophet 10 or Prophet 5 Rev 1 or in 1980 a double manual Prophet 10 with memory problems or in 1983 a Prophet 600 with a slow to respond CPU. All absolutely amazing and innovative instruments, but the road was a little rocky along the way! Thems the breaks if you go with a small, innovative, and enthusiastic company, as opposed to a massive corporation that makes bland but otherwise perfectly faultless stuff.

[Djinn]

" or in 1983 a Prophet 600 with a slow to respond CPU. All absolutely amazing and innovative instruments, but the road was a little rocky along the way! Thems the breaks if you go with a small, innovative, and enthusiastic company"

Sorry I don't buy this point... If ur suggesting we should wait for gligli type modification for our 4year old synths.. From a company that can't even decide on a name... This is 2021 not 1983

[maxter]

" or in 1983 a Prophet 600 with a slow to respond CPU. All absolutely amazing and innovative instruments, but the road was a little rocky along the way! Thems the breaks if you go with a small, innovative, and enthusiastic company"

Sorry I don't buy this point... If ur suggesting we should wait for gligli type modification for our 4year old synths.. From a company that can't even decide on a name... This is 2021 not 1983

Easy Djinn, it's only been 40 years or so, the learning curve is steep...     they just need more time, maybe in another 40 or so they'll pick up, please come again in the 60's...

Kind of makes you wonder how some of the brand new "small, innovative, and enthusiastic company"s pull it off without such shortcomings these days, some at first try even...? Weeeeell, with the exception of software bugs. Which are fixed with OS updates, you know? 

[Sacred Synthesis]

I'm not aware of the "massive corporations" that are now producing "perfectly flawless stuff."  I come across complaints about everyone's instruments.  Nor is a company's small size an excuse for designing instruments that are beyond its capacity to complete or maintain free of major flaws.  It should stay within its range of ability.  I don't think anything unreasonable is being requested here. 

As for the old days of analog instruments - I was there and I remember them well.  Yes, there were all sorts of problems with synthesizers, but they were due to the primitive state of the technology.  In 2021, that excuse is no longer acceptable.  A synthesizer company - large or small - should stay within it proper range of ability.  If it has an inspiring vision of magnificent instruments, but lacks the resources to produce them, then it should adjust its vision a little closer to reality.

Speaking of those old "analog days," I would quite prefer them to the present times.  If you were prudent in your choices of instruments, you could avoid much of the trouble.  I once owned a brand new Roland Juno 60 that never offered me a speck of trouble.  Is it unreasonable to expect the same of brand new instruments all these years later?  No, it's entirely fair and reasonable.  The problem is that we demand such advanced and sophisticated instruments, which pushes the designers to try to deliver, but which often results in all sorts of troubles because...well...those designers ultimately can't deliver.  They can produce something impressive, alright, but still filled with headaches for users.

Again, I may be alone in this view, but I would much prefer simpler synthesizers, so as to be spared the headaches.  I wish companies would stay within their range of ability in both design and maintenance.  This whole code and OS dilemma is just repulsive.  I don't want to be an involuntary Beta tester, not do I care to own an instrument that seems to be stuck in a state of development.  Just give me a finished product free of major problems.  And if you can't...please tell me!

[CPN37]

I'm not aware of the "massive corporations" that are now producing "perfectly flawless stuff."  I come across complaints about everyone's instruments.  Nor is a company's small size an excuse for designing instruments that are beyond its capacity to complete or maintain free of major flaws.  It should stay within its range of ability.  I don't think anything unreasonable is being requested here. 

As for the old days of analog instruments - I was there and I remember them well.  Yes, there were all sorts of problems with synthesizers, but they were due to the primitive state of the technology.  In 2021, that excuse is no longer acceptable.  A synthesizer company - large or small - should stay within it proper range of ability.  If it has an inspiring vision of magnificent instruments, but lacks the resources to produce them, then it should adjust its vision a little closer to reality.

Speaking of those old "analog days," I would quite prefer them to the present times.  If you were prudent in your choices of instruments, you could avoid much of the trouble.  I once owned a brand new Roland Juno 60 that never offered me a speck of trouble.  Is it unreasonable to expect the same of brand new instruments all these years later?  No, it's entirely fair and reasonable.  The problem is that we demand such advanced and sophisticated instruments, which pushes the designers to try to deliver, but which often results in all sorts of troubles because...well...those designers ultimately can't deliver.  They can produce something impressive, alright, but still filled with headaches for users.

Again, I may be alone in this view, but I would much prefer simpler synthesizers, so as to be spared the headaches.  I wish companies would stay within their range of ability in both design and maintenance.  This whole code and OS dilemma is just repulsive.  I don't want to be an involuntary Beta tester, not do I care to own an instrument that seems to be stuck in a state of development.  Just give me a finished product free of major problems.  And if you can't...please tell me!

Fair point! And I certainly don’t want to end up arguing the corner for companies to be lax and produce keyboards with major problems; my point was somewhere in the middle- yes it’s annoying but it was always thus (in one way or another) and perhaps it’s a downside of the kind of spirit that otherwise exists to produce great things. A downside nonetheless!

I mean, I’ve had a Juno 60 for the last 3 decades and my opinion was always that it’s maybe a little bit boring 😄