Prophet 5 rev4 pros and cons

[seqpro3]

im interested in hearing what prophet 5 rev 4 owners  think about the prophet5 rev 4. Pros and cons .
I’m interested in possibly getting one. I never had one before. Used to have a OBXA and a sequential pro1 . Currently I have the obx8 and the sequential pro3 and a Moog Voyager. The only concerns I have with the prophet5 rev4 is its voice count and the fact it’s not in stereo. Also had read about some quirks with the aftertouch and velocity that took a while to fix before it was stable in later updates.
My obx8 and voyager and pro3 are all in stereo. I like the physical layout and look of the P5rev4.
It has class. I’m a jazz player. It’s common for me to use eight note chord voicings. I could still get by with just 5 note voicings. I could do quartal harmony and traditional two five ones and half diminished to altered dominant voicings with five note polyphony. I saw where someone had converted thier headphone jack to a stereo out for thier prophet 10 rev4. I like the prophet 10 rev4 but opted to get the obx8 over it since the feature set the P10 offered was lacking as far as I was concerned. Mainly being it wasn’t in stereo. For some people that’s not an issue. I’ve heard audio demos of the prophet5 rev4 and 10 and was impressed with its sonic signature. It would be nice to have a prophet10 although budget restraints being what they are  and the fact I have a obx8 already make it not plausible.  Was interested in what owners that have had the P5 for awhile think , being that they have had time
To evaluate it . Thanks

[Quatschmacher]

Only real annoyance for me is the lack of (non-global) octave transposition for the whole synth and for layers A and B. (I got the 10-voice.)

Legato-only glide mode would be nice.

Everything else is great. Knob per function and a beautiful sound.

[g3o2]

Not to have one is a con :-) Polyphony with P10 is plenty, no need for more IMO. Mono is perfect because most often it sits better in a mix, plus you can add the pedal of your choice to “stereoize”.

[LPF83]

I have the P10, and while I do sometimes put it into regular 5-voice mode, I would really miss the ability to do poly unison  mode (5 notes, of two detuned voices stacked) if I didn't have all 10 voices to work with.

If the P10 wasn't available I'd still get a P5 in a heartbeat, and you can upgrade the P5 to 10 voice with a board -- it's just that it's slightly more expensive to add the board to a P5 than it is to just get a P10.

I don't use the split and stack features very often, but the 10 voices also helps if you want to use the bi-timbrality aspect.

[Analog Prophet]

I have a P5 rev 4 that was upgraded with a voice card to a P10 when firmware 2.0 was released. The reason was not to be able to play more notes, I don’t play synth as a piano but as a synth, but to stack, layer, split etc.

There are exceptional few synths that are stereo through the signal chain. U.D.O Super 6, modulars such Roland System 100m is another, Oberheim polys has stereo spreading of voices and some Sequential synths such P2000 and P6 has a limited voice stereo spread . The “stereo” at most synths is a stereo FX before the output. One can get any synth as a stereo synth by adding that EFX after the output instead i before the output at most “stereo” synths.

The mono output is a part of the beauty of simplicity of the P5 concept. The way Michael Boddicker recorded “Gloria” with a massive P5 sound illustrate how to use a P5 (from the book ”The Prophet from Silicon Valley). If I recall right :

First layer at one side, second layer with same sound slightly detuned at the other side, third layer an octave up at one side and a fourth layer sligtly detuned at the other side. Finally a more edgy sound as a fifth layer centered.

[robotecho]

I got my Prophet 5 around 18 months ago and couldn't stretch the budget to a P10. I never found the 5 voices to be a big limitation, but obviously if you want to do 8 note chords you're out of luck!

I upgraded to the extra 5 voices mainly because of poly unison, it sounds unreal. You can use it with 5 voice but then you are definitely working with some limitations. Stacks and split kind of sealed the deal, although I don't use them so much myself, and the implementation is a little clunky.

The beauty is you always have the option of upgrading if you buy the 5 and feel like you need the extra voices, I took a chance when I bought mine.

The stereo thing bugs me so much. It keeps coming up, but it's so rare for anyone to actually venture into exactly what stereo features they want on the synth. Should they chuck a bunch of digital effects in there? Or are we just talking about voice panning? Where are we putting the controls for all this?

The Obies have stereo voice panning, and if that's your bag great. I've always thought it was something of a parlour trick that sounds great for demoing the synth but hugely distracting for making music.

All the Prophet needs is a little reverb and delay, and those don't need to be on board.

It's not a synth that shines on paper because of specs, it's a synth that shines when you sit in front of it and play it. It's the one bit of gear that never loses it's gloss in my little studio, it's a dream to own one.

[seqpro3]

I remember Gloria. That was a long time ago. I didn’t know that MB played on that.  I remember  Betty Davis Eyes by Kim Carnes I think that’s who did it I probably spelled the name wrong. I would assume that was a prophet 5 as well. Don’t know for sure. I know Tony Banks and Peter Gabriel used the Prophet 5 ,there were so many people that used a prophet5
That it would be easier to list the people that didn’t use one. I remember seeing Susan Cianci probably spelled that wrong as well, on David Letterman playing and demonstrating a prophet 5.

[seqpro3]

The Prophet 5 is one of the all time greats. It’s cool that sequential is making them again. It’s crazy to think that the 2016 Minimoog reissue price new  was as much as the current asking price for the sequential prophet5 rev4  today. I think the prophet 5 rev4 is a better deal .  Those 2016 used  Minimoog RI prices are out of control.  The Prophet 5 rev4 is as iconic.

[Analog Prophet]

The Prophet 5 is one of the all time greats. It’s cool that sequential is making them again. It’s crazy to think that the 2016 Minimoog reissue price new  was as much as the current asking price for the sequential prophet5 rev4  today. I think the prophet 5 rev4 is a better deal .  Those 2016 used  Minimoog RI prices are out of control.  The Prophet 5 rev4 is as iconic.

I have the Minimoog 2016 ReIssue (had an original earlier, with too many issues) as well as a P5 rev 4 (with an additional voice boardupgraded to P10). The sound quality and timbre at the P5 is very similar to the Minimoog. I agree it is a better deal. At the other hand, the Minimoog is magic.

[seqpro3]

I played an original Minimoog Model D once when I was 16 yearsold. My friend had a Minimoog model D as well.  I wish I had kept my OBXA I bought used years ago. My voyagers after touch doesn’t work right and the voyager drifts. I really like the voyager to bad they have issues.  Im glad my mod and pitch wheels work alright as well as the touch screen. I’ve read about issues with others synths on the moog forum.  I wasn’t really thinking about after pressure until after I got the OBX8.
Sequential got the aftertouch right on the Pro3.  That new Minimoog RI looked great but way to expensive. The OBX8 is a better deal than the current Minimoog modelD RI in my opinion. 5,000 dollars is to much but Moog will get it because the Minimoog is so iconic.  I think it’s overpriced by $1500 dollars. Same as the OBX8 . These synths are iconic so they command a premium. I think the Prophet 5 rev 4 is the most reasonably priced at $3500.

[seqpro3]

The Prophet 5 is one of the all time greats. It’s cool that sequential is making them again. It’s crazy to think that the 2016 Minimoog reissue price new  was as much as the current asking price for the sequential prophet5 rev4  today. I think the prophet 5 rev4 is a better deal .  Those 2016 used  Minimoog RI prices are out of control.  The Prophet 5 rev4 is as iconic.

I have the Minimoog 2016 ReIssue (had an original earlier, with too many issues) as well as a P5 rev 4 (with an additional voice boardupgraded to P10). The sound quality and timbre at the P5 is very similar to the Minimoog. I agree it is a better deal. At the other hand, the Minimoog is magic.

Do you think the 2016 RI Minimoog was worth the asking price new at  $3500?

[Analog Prophet]

Do you think the 2016 RI Minimoog was worth the asking price new at  $3500?

It depends on how much you want it. I have not regret it.

[jdt9517]

Do you think the 2016 RI Minimoog was worth the asking price new at  $3500?

It depends on how much you want it. I have not regret it.

Nor have I.  I have a five voice Rev. 4.  Bought a Rev. 3.0 in the heyday.  Stupidly sold it when the P-5's started going out of style so I could buy a digital.  I think DS spent the decades trying to figure out how to fix the shortcomings of the earlier revs while keeping it the masterpiece it is.  AFAIC, he succeeded masterfully.  If one wants a true Prophet, the Rev. 4 is it.

[SynthHead]

IMO wasn't that impressed with OB-X8 as an OB-6 /Prophet 10 owner, but mainly due to the poor interface/menu diving... also due to it not sounding AS good as the Prophet 10 which was cheaper + had 2 more voices which is awesome for stacking/poly unison while 8 voices is not quite enough for that (for me). That said, obv X8 is a beauty too.

Tonally the Prophet rev 4 takes the gold though, but this may be down to tastes. My personal pref is a Prophet 10 r4 + OB-6 which is the same or cheaper (if you buy used) than a new X8 is and the combo does far more and sounds as good/better in most cases.

The P5 is cool but you'll miss having more poly, tht's what always put me off grabbing a vintage P5 even when they were decently priced... 6 minimum... 8 is cool.. but 10 is perfect for me, just enough for long runs and chord changes (sometimes 5 note chords) without being cut off. Sounds sublime.

Prophet rev 4 sounds that good it's a shame not to get it in its highest form with the Prophet 10 and have all that power and flexibility on hand to do it justice. Stacks and Poly unision is probably the best sounds you'll get on a modern poly analog so having 10 voices is vital for this!

That said, if you can only afford the 5 it's still a great synth with the same overall great tone, feel and interface.

[g3o2]

The only concerns I have with the prophet5 rev4 is its voice count and the fact it’s not in stereo. […] It would be nice to have a prophet10 although budget restraints being what they are  and the fact I have a obx8 already make it not plausible.

I’ve gone for the P10 desktop instead of the key version. Makes it roughly 1k more affordable and it takes less space.

The mono out is a not a big issue IMO for several reasons:

* mono allows your Prophet to sink into the mix perfectly, as it is meant to be, so that your OB-X8 can do what it does best: brag and shine;
* mono is perfect in a band context and as a jazz player you can certainly appreciate that it does not stand in the way of your acoustic or digital piano sound;
* ironically, creating a nice stereo image when producing songs is so much easier with mono tracks;
* for occasions when you need the Prophet to be stereo, a wonderful stereo delay pedal, ideally with a knob per function interface for a perfect marriage (e.g Volante, Oto B..), will do the job, you may have guessed it, wonderfully ;
* there is no voice pan on the Prophet, sorry, it is the OB-X8 that is meant to shine. Without voice pan and on-board effects, stereo out makes little sense.

There is only one reason for which a mono out sucks: us, the keyboardists. Not many synths have mono out only these days, even if their true stereo capabilities are often limited. So it requires some extra time and helpers (cables, cabling, effects, etc.) to get used to the Prophet’s mono out.

It’s like the Prophet does want to stand out by requiring some kind of special treatment. A synth with character after all :-)

[dr.sax]

After all these years of piling up stacks of synthesizers and other sound stuff I must admit I´m only using my P10 and my model D Moog. Plus keyscape from spectrasonics. I´m thinking of getting rid of the other stuff since I have the feeling it´s obstructing my workflow. I plain love it  having the knob layout of the keyboard P10 plus the Minimoog. No menu diving.

[Manbird]

After all these years of piling up stacks of synthesizers and other sound stuff I must admit I´m only using my P10 and my model D Moog. Plus keyscape from spectrasonics. I´m thinking of getting rid of the other stuff since I have the feeling it´s obstructing my workflow. I plain love it  having the knob layout of the keyboard P10 plus the Minimoog. No menu diving.

Funny, but as of yesterday I seem to be hitting a similar spot in the grand scheme. I'm not looking to let go of my gear, but I turned half of my instruments off and put a blanket over some, moving others to the basement. Even the Prophet 6 that sits in front of me as master keyboard is powered down. I've only got Prophet 5 and Korg MS20 (plus Yamaha CP and Digitakt) to run with for now. A great feeling of "liberation through simplification." I love my Korg Prologue and do use it on many recordings, but it, like other synths in my studio, often has a "should" hanging over its head. As in, I *should* use this one more, even though I use it often. Roland System 8 is a great pleasure to play - such a range of sounds inside - but I don't often include it on recordings and find myself instead distracted by it as if it's a toy. So yeah, my synth set-up is, for the moment, suddenly simple and very satisfying. The Prophet 5 is the electronic centerpiece for me, and if it was the only synth I had to work with, that'd be just fine.

[LPF83]

After all these years of piling up stacks of synthesizers and other sound stuff I must admit I´m only using my P10 and my model D Moog. Plus keyscape from spectrasonics. I´m thinking of getting rid of the other stuff since I have the feeling it´s obstructing my workflow. I plain love it  having the knob layout of the keyboard P10 plus the Minimoog. No menu diving.

Funny, but as of yesterday I seem to be hitting a similar spot in the grand scheme. I'm not looking to let go of my gear, but I turned half of my instruments off and put a blanket over some, moving others to the basement. Even the Prophet 6 that sits in front of me as master keyboard is powered down. I've only got Prophet 5 and Korg MS20 (plus Yamaha CP and Digitakt) to run with for now. A great feeling of "liberation through simplification." I love my Korg Prologue and do use it on many recordings, but it, like other synths in my studio, often has a "should" hanging over its head. As in, I *should* use this one more, even though I use it often. Roland System 8 is a great pleasure to play - such a range of sounds inside - but I don't often include it on recordings and find myself instead distracted by it as if it's a toy. So yeah, my synth set-up is, for the moment, suddenly simple and very satisfying. The Prophet 5 is the electronic centerpiece for me, and if it was the only synth I had to work with, that'd be just fine.

The Prophet 5/10 is a songwriters dreamsynth, and I think the simplicity / immediacy of it is what's so inspiring for a song writer.  For a sound designer looking for experimentation, I do understand how it can seem limiting, but at the same time, features can look good on paper or in concept while actually working against the process of creating good music.  Example, I love the aftertouch of the Rev4, but the implementation was too sensitive and flawed to be usable until the most recent update.  So when I heard the difference in the new AT sensitivity settings with the OS 2.04 update I was overjoyed... until I realized that the per-patch setting flexibilty (again, looks good on paper) comes at the expense of the song writing process... if I want to flip through patches to audition them for a riff, I now have to adjust the AT sensitivity for each patch on each change (and that disrupts the creative process).   As a result, I find myself just wanting to turn off AT altogether, which then limits how the riff can be played.  So "flexibility" ended up enforcing a limitation. 
Global AT sensitivity settings make much more sense from the perspective of a musician, per-patch make more sense for sound experimentation.  But it is what it is.

Don't get me wrong, I love this synth more than any of my other gear (but it is a pros and cons thread after all .. the same simplicity that makes it amazing should be preserved IMHO.  Adding tons of features and programmability might make a synth a better computer but it does not make it a better instrument.  I think per-patch AT and VEL settings were a mistake personally.

[Analog Prophet]

A Prophet 5 has mono out, period. Other synths has stereo out, but they are not Prophet 5 (except the classic P10, but it’s technical 2 X Prophet 5 - equals 2 outputs). Prophet 6 is a Prophet 5 with a modern twist with stereo out, onboard EFX etc, and by reason called Prophet 6, not Prophet 5.

[Quatschmacher]

After all these years of piling up stacks of synthesizers and other sound stuff I must admit I´m only using my P10 and my model D Moog. Plus keyscape from spectrasonics. I´m thinking of getting rid of the other stuff since I have the feeling it´s obstructing my workflow. I plain love it  having the knob layout of the keyboard P10 plus the Minimoog. No menu diving.

Funny, but as of yesterday I seem to be hitting a similar spot in the grand scheme. I'm not looking to let go of my gear, but I turned half of my instruments off and put a blanket over some, moving others to the basement. Even the Prophet 6 that sits in front of me as master keyboard is powered down. I've only got Prophet 5 and Korg MS20 (plus Yamaha CP and Digitakt) to run with for now. A great feeling of "liberation through simplification." I love my Korg Prologue and do use it on many recordings, but it, like other synths in my studio, often has a "should" hanging over its head. As in, I *should* use this one more, even though I use it often. Roland System 8 is a great pleasure to play - such a range of sounds inside - but I don't often include it on recordings and find myself instead distracted by it as if it's a toy. So yeah, my synth set-up is, for the moment, suddenly simple and very satisfying. The Prophet 5 is the electronic centerpiece for me, and if it was the only synth I had to work with, that'd be just fine.

The Prophet 5/10 is a songwriters dreamsynth, and I think the simplicity / immediacy of it is what's so inspiring for a song writer.  For a sound designer looking for experimentation, I do understand how it can seem limiting, but at the same time, features can look good on paper or in concept while actually working against the process of creating good music.  Example, I love the aftertouch of the Rev4, but the implementation was too sensitive and flawed to be usable until the most recent update.  So when I heard the difference in the new AT sensitivity settings with the OS 2.04 update I was overjoyed... until I realized that the per-patch setting flexibilty (again, looks good on paper) comes at the expense of the song writing process... if I want to flip through patches to audition them for a riff, I now have to adjust the AT sensitivity for each patch on each change (and that disrupts the creative process).   As a result, I find myself just wanting to turn off AT altogether, which then limits how the riff can be played.  So "flexibility" ended up enforcing a limitation. 
Global AT sensitivity settings make much more sense from the perspective of a musician, per-patch make more sense for sound experimentation.  But it is what it is.

Don't get me wrong, I love this synth more than any of my other gear (but it is a pros and cons thread after all .. the same simplicity that makes it amazing should be preserved IMHO.  Adding tons of features and programmability might make a synth a better computer but it does not make it a better instrument.  I think per-patch AT and VEL settings were a mistake personally.

If you set all aftertouch depths to 127, and save it’s functionally identical to the previous on/off behaviour. Any patches that were on the synth before the latest update will be 127 by default when engaged so you shouldn’t see any difference. Only difference is in patches you program yourself or download from others.