Take 5 vs Prophet 5 Rev 4: raw sound?

[Josh C]

this is to anyone who has both. when it comes to the Rall tone of the oscillators, Filters, etc., how do they compare? I have noticed on demos of the Rev 4 that it is easy to get bass sounds with insane low end. I haven't heard that on any of the demos of the Take 5 yet. Also is the overall sound of the Take 5 brighter than the Rev 4?

[LPF83]

this is to anyone who has both. when it comes to the Rall tone of the oscillators, Filters, etc., how do they compare? I have noticed on demos of the Rev 4 that it is easy to get bass sounds with insane low end. I haven't heard that on any of the demos of the Take 5 yet. Also is the overall sound of the Take 5 brighter than the Rev 4?

I too would like to hear some dry tone (no FX) from the T5, but I don't think anyone should be looking for a comparison between the Take5 and the Prophet 5/10... they are meant to be different animals at different price points.  The selling point on the Take5 is portability, it is apparently a hybrid of sorts rather than "pure" analog with much of the signal path being digital.

But for a synth like this, I wouldn't expect raw tone to enter the realm of the Rev4, I would judge it for how it sounds post FX (and from what I've heard from demos, its a good sound).

Throughout music history, sometimes the more accessible, lower-cost synths actually had a bigger footprint on legendary tracks.  Their more accessible price put them in the hands of more musicians, and that meant more creative surface area.   Finding ways to work around limits is what led to unusual and interesting things happening with them.  Look at the Junos for example -- I remember people mocking then for only having one oscillator, and a digitally controlled one at that.  So instead of focusing on what can the P5/10 (or P6, or OB6, or Rev2) do that the T5 can't, I'm asking myself what does the T5 do differently?  Does it have a place in my studio, or is that need already met, etc?

Dave is big into each synth having its own personality.  I think that buying a T5 expecting a P5 Junior would be a mistake...  Buying a T5 because you like its unique sound would be the win.

[creativespiral]

@SeanCostello mentioned on GS that the Take 5 can sound extremely close to the Prophet 5r4 in 1/2 filter mode...   Starting around Page 35 of the GS thread, you can read his comparison/thoughts:
https://gearspace.com/board/electronic-music-instruments-and-electronic-music-production/1359296-sequential-take-5-a-35.html

"- It can sound REALLY CLOSE to my Prophet-10. Like, freakishly close."

" I'm able to pretty much exactly duplicate some of my favorite Prophet-10 sounds on the Take 5."

"Take 5 differs from the Prophet-5/10 in a significant way: the Take 5 filter is using Q compensation."

"I should be clear. The Take 5 doesn't sound EXACTLY like my Prophet-10. However, I can make it sound EXACTLY like the types of patches I tend to program on the Prophet-10:

- lower resonance settings
- low values of oscillator FM

Once you turn up the resonance and/or oscillator FM, the Take 5 and the Prophet-10 sound different:

- The Take 5 has Q compensated filters, that don't lose the bass when the resonance is turned up. The Prophet-10 filters lose the bass. Not as much as, say, the Moog Grandmother (which has a MASSIVE bass, that quickly goes away as you turn up the resonance), but some bass. So matching higher resonance sounds between the Take 5 and Prophet-10 would be harder to do.

- The VCO FM on the Take 5 is much milder than the Polymod OSC B -> FREQ A setting. It seems like a much shallow FM depth. Which doesn't affect the sort of patches I make, since the higher FM depth on the Prophet-10 results in pitch differences per note due to variations between the different polymod VCAs (exponential FM is VERY sensitive to the index). The Take 5 has enough FM depth for my purposes."

[creativespiral]

One other difference is in Voice Allocation.  Take 5 currently only offers round robin voice allocation, and P5 offers a per-key voice allocation as well.   Hopefully per-key voice allocation can be added as a firmware update to Take 5.   This would help to get more of the vintage P5 character, and will be more noticeable when dialing up the Vintage Knob to higher settings. 

At the end of the day, they are still going to have minor differences, but Take 5 is definitely from the same DNA as the P5 family, and will be able to accomplish the majority of the core sound... and of course it will do a lot that the P5/10 is not able to do, with the expanded sound design palette / mod matrix. 

[LPF83]

@SeanCostello mentioned on GS that the Take 5 can sound extremely close to the Prophet 5r4 in 1/2 filter mode...   Starting around Page 35 of the GS thread, you can read his comparison/thoughts:
https://gearspace.com/board/electronic-music-instruments-and-electronic-music-production/1359296-sequential-take-5-a-35.html

But also you notice he qualifies that heavily by saying he is speaking in the context of the kinds of sounds he likes to make.  He writes FX for a living, and if you take two synths and run them through the same plugin (not saying that was the basis for his comparison, just saying), they are going to pick up a lot of the same characteristics.  This is why I want to hear the T5 raw tone in a lot of different contexts before I decide whether its for me or not.  In all of the demos I've heard, it sounds like a nice sounding synth but almost nothing that I hear in my P10 seems to be there.

Really sound comparisons are in the ears of the beholder.  When folks sit down to make one synth sound like the other, they can usually get them to sound indistinguishable in that test.  It's what happens when you start moving the knobs all over the place during playing where all the differences start to really come through. 

I guess my ears are very sensitive to the differences in tone, because while I realize the P6 is probably the closest thing to the Rev4 (and there are certainly some cases I wouldn't be able to tell the difference in a youtube video), having them sitting side by side the default sounds that come out of them are so different, its hard to even remember they are from the same manufacturer.  Others may think they sound the same?  I dunno.   Just listing to YT videos, the P6 sounds closer to the Rev4 to me than the T5.

[LPF83]

One other difference is in Voice Allocation.  Take 5 currently only offers round robin voice allocation, and P5 offers a per-key voice allocation as well.   Hopefully per-key voice allocation can be added as a firmware update to Take 5.   This would help to get more of the vintage P5 character, and will be more noticeable when dialing up the Vintage Knob to higher settings. 

At the end of the day, they are still going to have minor differences, but Take 5 is definitely from the same DNA as the P5 family, and will be able to accomplish the majority of the core sound... and of course it will do a lot that the P5/10 is not able to do, with the expanded sound design palette / mod matrix.

The Rev4 will do either P5 (per voice) or round robin, and it does make a difference depending on the sound, but perhaps not as much as one might think on most sounds.  I have my own opinions regarding DNA, because I feel the CEM3340 is hugely important to vintage sound (its the oscillator most of the prominent VCO based vintage synths were based on).  I also do believe the Rev4 (especially with the latest update) can do a lot of things the current OS in the Take5 cannot (poly unison, bi timbrality with split and stack, etc), both Rev1/2 and 3 filters, fully analog signal path, 10 voices, lots of patch storage, etc. but then again the purpose of the Rev4 is really replication of that vintage tone, which it has in spades.

Please don't think I'm knocking the T5.  It sounds good from what I've heard.  It just (to my ears) sounds nothing like a Rev4.   I'm quite sure that if I have both of them in the same room, I can come up with a few dozen sounds that sound the same on both.   I can do that with any of my synths including the minilogue xd and the rev4.  But that does not mean it plays the same as the Rev4 across the entire spectrum of knob turns and tweaks.... not even close.

Also I should say, when I listen to my Rev4 it is either dry or through higher quality FX than what come on Sequential synths.  Currently my P10 goes to a Mobius first, then Timeline, then OTO Bam.  In the T5 vids I've seen, the sound is not in the same league as that combination, which is understandable since the FX units alone cost more than the synth.  But that is why I want to hear the dry tone of the T5 up against the Rev4, without any FX on either, to hear how close it can really be.  It won't be in vids that use FX, because most buyers at that price point will not add that sort of outboard gear, but it would be a great experiment just to hear the dry tone by itself.

[creativespiral]

I'm assuming for his A/B comparisons he didn't parade them through the halls of Valhalla.

The Sine vs Triangle, and Resonance Compensation is probably going to be the biggest differences in raw character when comparing with P5r5 in 1/2 mode.  That is something that will be noticeable, especially as you get into high resonance tones.   

You are correct that he mentions "for the sounds he usually makes"... I did include that quote above.    It's actually a very good distinction to note, because I'm sure there will be differences when certain parameters are pushed to extremes.   Extreme resonance, FM, gain staging, etc.    It's just that the majority of sound design is usually not pushing into those extremes, unless you're really focused on more experimental stuff, industrial, or sound effects.   For the majority of bread and butter classic and modern P5 sounds, I'm guessing it will be very similar.   That's my speculation anyway... I'm sure we'll see some more A/B comparisons popping up soon.

But yeah, I'm personally not all that concerned with it being an exact P5 match...   I've been playing it over the past week, and it sounds really good, and I'm able to get that general Prophet vibe with it.    I've got a P6 as well, and it's definitely up there in raw sound quality.   I'll probably only keep one of them in long term, and so far it's probably going to be the T5, as I like the deeper sound engine. 

Per Key allocation would definitely help to match the vintage P5 character.  It is noticeable if you play repeated notes, particularly low octave/bass lines that are not in unison mode.   Instead of layering the release tails of repeated notes with multiple voices, the Per Key cuts the tails and retriggers the same voice, resulting in significant difference in the character of bass lines, or other repetitive pulsing notes / chords.   Also, when you start to crank up the per-voice variance, the Per Key allocation shows more colors.  You get a certain consistency/order with per-key voice variance. 

------------

I've been considering adding a new dedicated reverb unit to my setup.  Was just watching some vids on OTO BAM this past week.   Looks pretty interesting. 

[LPF83]

I'm assuming for his A/B comparisons he didn't parade them through the halls of Valhalla.

The Sine vs Triangle, and Resonance Compensation is probably going to be the biggest differences in raw character when comparing with P5r5 in 1/2 mode.  That is something that will be noticeable, especially as you get into high resonance tones.   

You are correct that he mentions "for the sounds he usually makes"... I did include that quote above.    It's actually a very good distinction to note, because I'm sure there will be differences when certain parameters are pushed to extremes.   Extreme resonance, FM, gain staging, etc.    It's just that the majority of sound design is usually not pushing into those extremes, unless you're really focused on more experimental stuff, industrial, or sound effects.   For the majority of bread and butter classic and modern P5 sounds, I'm guessing it will be very similar.   That's my speculation anyway... I'm sure we'll see some more A/B comparisons popping up soon.

But yeah, I'm personally not all that concerned with it being an exact P5 match...   I've been playing it over the past week, and it sounds really good, and I'm able to get that general Prophet vibe with it.    I've got a P6 as well, and it's definitely up there in raw sound quality.   I'll probably only keep one of them in long term, and so far it's probably going to be the T5, as I like the deeper sound engine. 

Per Key allocation would definitely help to match the vintage P5 character.  It is noticeable if you play repeated notes, particularly low octave/bass lines that are not in unison mode.   Instead of layering the release tails of repeated notes with multiple voices, the Per Key cuts the tails and retriggers the same voice, resulting in significant difference in the character of bass lines, or other repetitive pulsing notes / chords.   Also, when you start to crank up the per-voice variance, the Per Key allocation shows more colors.  You get a certain consistency/order with per-key voice variance. 

------------

I've been considering adding a new dedicated reverb unit to my setup.  Was just watching some vids on OTO BAM this past week.   Looks pretty interesting.

There are a few reasons I don't think I could completely replace my P6 with a T5.  The P6 (as well as OB-6) allow a special trick that I actually use a lot:  with two FX slots I can do this multi-thing where both slots are used for chorus, with staggered settings.  On certain sounds, there are sweet spots to be found by playing with the chorus settings that really transform the tone into something special that I find hard to achieve any other way.   I also feel the LP filter on the P6 is more similar to the CEM3320 on the Rev4 than the SSI2140, and I would miss having that in combination with the other P6 features -- its a great option for punchiness.  On the same hand, if I did not have a Rev4, the T5 seems like a good option to get the longer-growlier sounds that I like in the SSI2140.

The BAM is a bit pricey but worth it, IMO.  It excels at transparent / vintage sounding reverb that doesn't color the sound source.  The overall range of tone available in each algorithm as presented by a handful of knobs is stunning, really.  I would have preferred a better display.. it uses dot positions to communicate values to the user, which I don't think is ideal, but since reverb is usually dialed in by ear, its not a major strike.

[ronnie19@gmail.com]

I'm assuming for his A/B comparisons he didn't parade them through the halls of Valhalla.

The Sine vs Triangle, and Resonance Compensation is probably going to be the biggest differences in raw character when comparing with P5r5 in 1/2 mode.  That is something that will be noticeable, especially as you get into high resonance tones.   

You are correct that he mentions "for the sounds he usually makes"... I did include that quote above.    It's actually a very good distinction to note, because I'm sure there will be differences when certain parameters are pushed to extremes.   Extreme resonance, FM, gain staging, etc.    It's just that the majority of sound design is usually not pushing into those extremes, unless you're really focused on more experimental stuff, industrial, or sound effects.   For the majority of bread and butter classic and modern P5 sounds, I'm guessing it will be very similar.   That's my speculation anyway... I'm sure we'll see some more A/B comparisons popping up soon.

But yeah, I'm personally not all that concerned with it being an exact P5 match...   I've been playing it over the past week, and it sounds really good, and I'm able to get that general Prophet vibe with it.    I've got a P6 as well, and it's definitely up there in raw sound quality.   I'll probably only keep one of them in long term, and so far it's probably going to be the T5, as I like the deeper sound engine. 

Per Key allocation would definitely help to match the vintage P5 character.  It is noticeable if you play repeated notes, particularly low octave/bass lines that are not in unison mode.   Instead of layering the release tails of repeated notes with multiple voices, the Per Key cuts the tails and retriggers the same voice, resulting in significant difference in the character of bass lines, or other repetitive pulsing notes / chords.   Also, when you start to crank up the per-voice variance, the Per Key allocation shows more colors.  You get a certain consistency/order with per-key voice variance. 

------------

I've been considering adding a new dedicated reverb unit to my setup.  Was just watching some vids on OTO BAM this past week.   Looks pretty interesting.

Which dedicated reverb unit are you considering if you don't mind me asking? looking at some myself, like Big Sky/Strymon...

[creativespiral]

You can't go wrong with the Big Sky verbs... very high quality, with tons of sound sculpting options.   I've had mixed success with Source Audio pedals - they sound great, and have lots of options, but can act finicky with hotter line level signals.   

I recently ordered a Hologram Microcosm to experiment with on Take 5 / Pro 3.  It's not really focused on "classic reverb" though - more for experimental reverb sounds, granular, and unique delay/verb textures.   

On the more affordable end of things, I recommend TC Hall of Fame 2 -  Stereo signal path, great sounding reverb algorithms, including shimmer and more unique verb sounds - and under $150... I have two of them.

The built in dedicated reverb on the Take 5 sounds pretty good, so I'm not feeling that much a need to add a standard outboard verb pedal -- hence my decision to go for a Microcosm, for more unique sounds.   


Back to original topic, Starsky Carr did a comparison:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccxp2m0tO3Y

Definitely similar sound.   I wonder if Take 5 has a de-CAP-itation option?      The first couple hundred Prophet 5/10s with the C218/C221 capacitors had a slightly darker sound / high end cutoff, like Starsky points out on the T5.   

(https://www.sequential.com/prophet-5-prophet-10-cap-mod/)   

Not that I would do it - I think the Take 5 sounds great as-is, but just wondering...

[chysn]

On the more affordable end of things, I recommend TC Hall of Fame 2 -  Stereo signal path, great sounding reverb algorithms, including shimmer and more unique verb sounds - and under $150... I have two of them.

Also TC offers a comprehensive computer-based editor, so you can shape your reverbs in a ton of different ways. You just reminded me that I have a Hall of Fame, but it doesn't currently work. I ought to find it and try to get it going again.

[xoxo]

Which dedicated reverb unit are you considering if you don't mind me asking? looking at some myself, like Big Sky/Strymon...

The Strymon Night Sky is a really great reverb - very easy to go from small rooms to very unreal spaces.