Beware the storm that gathers here...

Discussions about anything analog, digital, MIDI, synth technology, techniques, theories and more.
User avatar
Postblank
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 12:56 am
Location: NJ
Contact:

Post by Postblank » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:18 pm

slowalan wrote:I thought everyone had a P8?

Over twenty musos in small towns in rural New Zealand were given P8s to trial last year. I see them all the time used at bush dances, and weddings.

They don't suck as far as I can tell, but the people who are playing them probably do, they wear silly hats and wear gumboots for sheepshagging.
I'm moving to New Zealand.
Keys: Wurlitzer 200A, Nord Electro 2, Arp Omni 2, Yamaha DX-7 II FD, Casio VL-Tone 1, Roland JX-10

wilsontherocker
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 3:29 pm
Location: Asheville, NC

Post by wilsontherocker » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:20 pm

After reading practically this whole thread, I find it's title very fitting.

Congrats to DSI for what looks to be a wonderful new product! Perhaps one day, I'll actually get to play one... But for now, I'm still ever-so-happy with my Evolver.

elmacaco
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2005 5:39 am

Post by elmacaco » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:59 pm

So Bryce, are the OSC and Filter FM amount VCA's tuned accurately to make consistant polyphonic analog FM patches? Maybe a betatester knows. That would be incredible.

The Andromeda is 16 parts multitimbral and it's pretty sweet. the kind of layering and splits you can do are as flexible as your imagination, let alone having 16 monosynths. Funny, I don;t own a polysynth (analog or digital) that isn;t multitimbral, I don't always use it, but I do use it quite a bit.

For DSI, multitimbral operation is probably partly a cost thing and partly an effort to make the P8 not compete too directly with the PEK and PER. Not a deal breaker for everyone but besides the cost can someone think of a drawback for it to be multitimbral?

The DCO thing is a moot point, the evolver sounds good and if the FM is calibrated accurately the DCO's will be handy, plus there is osc slop and modulation so it isn't the end of the world. At least they are still analog oscillators.

Personally, How a synth sounds isn't as important as how I can make it sound, and so the availability of features and flexiblity is more important than minor differences in raw sound. I like VCO's, but if it's DCO's with lots of modulation and osc slop and other tricks, it gives me more options than just to make it sound more like a VCO, so that can be a good thing.

When you really learn a synth you can make it sound like a lot more than you can imagine, and the raw character of it can be accentuated or masked, and you can bend it to your needs with techniques perhaps not forseen by the designers.

I think it is good to talk about the weakpoints of synths, not to rain on anyone's parade, but to examine the needs and tools of synthesists and musicians.

When the little fatty came out I and other's thought one mod bus was weak, and we were met by all sorts of defenders and 'fanboys' saying we should be quiet in the house of god etc. Then what do they add in a firmware update? A second modulation option, kludged in the Software, but present in large part due to the observations of actual users. IMO they should seek those people out for beta testers, since even if they disagree they will hear more about the weakpoints. Imagine if the fatty had front panel controls for that second mod source or the filter poles, it could have been designed into it from the get go and integrated more into the UI than it currently is. Again, we all want a better synth, we all will settle for something rather than nothing, and the balance and discussion can lead to great things.

I think in general everybody overestimates two things on forums:

1. the intelligence of the forum posters

and

2. Their own intelligence.

No one knows everything, every perspective has something to offer if you consider it, and observations are not damnations and will not sink or float a product.

So what's up with the FM index Dave? ;)

Titus Lucius
No Longer Registered

Post by Titus Lucius » Thu Aug 16, 2007 6:19 pm

[quote="elmacaco"]So Bryce, are the OSC and Filter FM amount VCA's tuned accurately to make consistant polyphonic analog FM patches? Maybe a betatester knows. That would be incredible.

The Andromeda is 16 parts multitimbral and it's pretty sweet. the kind of layering and splits you can do are as flexible as your imagination, let alone having 16 monosynths. Funny, I don;t own a polysynth (analog or digital) that isn;t multitimbral, I don't always use it, but I do use it quite a bit.

For DSI, multitimbral operation is probably partly a cost thing and partly an effort to make the P8 not compete too directly with the PEK and PER. Not a deal breaker for everyone but besides the cost can someone think of a drawback for it to be multitimbral?

The DCO thing is a moot point, the evolver sounds good and if the FM is calibrated accurately the DCO's will be handy, plus there is osc slop and modulation so it isn't the end of the world. At least they are still analog oscillators.

Personally, How a synth sounds isn't as important as how I can make it sound, and so the availability of features and flexiblity is more important than minor differences in raw sound. I like VCO's, but if it's DCO's with lots of modulation and osc slop and other tricks, it gives me more options than just to make it sound more like a VCO, so that can be a good thing.

When you really learn a synth you can make it sound like a lot more than you can imagine, and the raw character of it can be accentuated or masked, and you can bend it to your needs with techniques perhaps not forseen by the designers.

I think it is good to talk about the weakpoints of synths, not to rain on anyone's parade, but to examine the needs and tools of synthesists and musicians.

When the little fatty came out I and other's thought one mod bus was weak, and we were met by all sorts of defenders and 'fanboys' saying we should be quiet in the house of god etc. Then what do they add in a firmware update? A second modulation option, kludged in the Software, but present in large part due to the observations of actual users. IMO they should seek those people out for beta testers, since even if they disagree they will hear more about the weakpoints. Imagine if the fatty had front panel controls for that second mod source or the filter poles, it could have been designed into it from the get go and integrated more into the UI than it currently is. Again, we all want a better synth, we all will settle for something rather than nothing, and the balance and discussion can lead to great things.

I think in general everybody overestimates two things on forums:

1. the intelligence of the forum posters

and

2. Their own intelligence.

No one knows everything, every perspective has something to offer if you consider it, and observations are not damnations and will not sink or float a product.
..../quote]

Ah - a voice of reason. Actually, some of us underestiate their own intelligence.
Last edited by Titus Lucius on Thu Aug 16, 2007 6:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
code green
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 535
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 6:58 am
Gear: prophet 600/evolver/juno 6/alpha juno 2/bassst'n/crumar performer/jv1010/suitcase rhodes 73/ '78 gibson l6-s/'73 guild mahogany/'69 fender princeton
Band: thermite zapruder
Location: brooklyn

Post by code green » Thu Aug 16, 2007 6:21 pm

i think i've read this whole shebang now. some thoughts (some brought on by the earliest pages):

-i would imagine the drum pad portion of the boomchik will be modeled at least loosely one the mpc line (NOT the mc-505), as roger linn designed the mpc.
-i think it's perfectly legit to discuss a synth (yes, even one for which we don't have full specs, photos, and haven't heard) in terms of what one would like from it in order to consider a purchase, and to bemoan those elements that we know won't be there--such as multitimbrality. HOWEVER, given the general goals for this synth as laid out by dB early on in this thread--including desired price point--i still can't quite figure out how multitimbrality (or its lack) has become such a focal point for discussion of this particular synth.

someone above complained that expressions of gratitude towards Dave Smith for inventing MIDI, etc., were a non-sequitur; to me, though, the focus on multi-timbrality is kind of the ultimate non-sequitur. it seems clear that this is meant--like its forebear, the p5--to be a PLAYER'S synth, aimed in large part at gigging musicians who want a great sounding analog poly but who are reluctant to shell out ca. $2k+ for a 20-year-old-plus p5 and all its associated maintenance hassles.

if that's the case--and i think it is--it is aimed directly at me, and i for one am psyched. i sympathize with those who heard the news, felt the rush of GAS, and then realized that for this reason or that it's not quite for them...but, again, given the precis that dB laid out, dissing dave smith/DSI for not giving them the synth THEY want seems as absurd as my being annoyed at the Fantom for not being analog.

and yes, in addition to some thoughtful back-and-forth about the subject of multitimbrality, there was also some outright dissing of dave smith--and i think THAT'S what really set some people here off, not thoughts that to debate and question a synth amounts to heresy.

i mean, my goodness. pretty much whatever gear you have, you can look around your studio and thank dave smith. i know i do. i have absolutely no sense of slavish devotion to a brand or label--whoever made it, if it sounds good, i'll like it--but again and again i find myself using his gear b/c it is just so damned good and interesting. but even w/out any dsi/sci gear in my studio, i'd still owe him a debt because his imprimatur can be found directly and indirectly on so many other developments that make it possible to have so much synth power at one's fingertips these days.

go dave(s)!!!

Titus Lucius
No Longer Registered

Post by Titus Lucius » Thu Aug 16, 2007 6:29 pm

Note - it isn't a non sequitur to simply say that multitimbrality is a factor in my decision to purchase. I do agree that any dissing of Dave Smith is out of hand (though I'm in favor of the freedom of speech to do it).

JUGEL
No Longer Registered

Post by JUGEL » Thu Aug 16, 2007 6:40 pm

code green wrote:it seems clear that this is meant--like its forebear, the p5--to be a PLAYER'S synth,
ah players again... I know of many "non-player" artists that used the P 5 and the Pro-One.. they also played a major part in why analog came back into style in the first place.
Last edited by JUGEL on Thu Aug 16, 2007 6:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

prophei
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 5:52 pm
Contact:

Post by prophei » Thu Aug 16, 2007 6:42 pm

code green wrote:i think i've read this whole shebang now. some thoughts (some brought on by the earliest pages):

-i would imagine the drum pad portion of the boomchik will be modeled at least loosely one the mpc line (NOT the mc-505), as roger linn designed the mpc.
-i think it's perfectly legit to discuss a synth (yes, even one for which we don't have full specs, photos, and haven't heard) in terms of what one would like from it in order to consider a purchase, and to bemoan those elements that we know won't be there--such as multitimbrality. HOWEVER, given the general goals for this synth as laid out by dB early on in this thread--including desired price point--i still can't quite figure out how multitimbrality (or its lack) has become such a focal point for discussion of this particular synth.

someone above complained that expressions of gratitude towards Dave Smith for inventing MIDI, etc., were a non-sequitur; to me, though, the focus on multi-timbrality is kind of the ultimate non-sequitur. it seems clear that this is meant--like its forebear, the p5--to be a PLAYER'S synth, aimed in large part at gigging musicians who want a great sounding analog poly but who are reluctant to shell out ca. $2k+ for a 20-year-old-plus p5 and all its associated maintenance hassles.

if that's the case--and i think it is--it is aimed directly at me, and i for one am psyched. i sympathize with those who heard the news, felt the rush of GAS, and then realized that for this reason or that it's not quite for them...but, again, given the precis that dB laid out, dissing dave smith/DSI for not giving them the synth THEY want seems as absurd as my being annoyed at the Fantom for not being analog.

and yes, in addition to some thoughtful back-and-forth about the subject of multitimbrality, there was also some outright dissing of dave smith--and i think THAT'S what really set some people here off, not thoughts that to debate and question a synth amounts to heresy.

i mean, my goodness. pretty much whatever gear you have, you can look around your studio and thank dave smith. i know i do. i have absolutely no sense of slavish devotion to a brand or label--whoever made it, if it sounds good, i'll like it--but again and again i find myself using his gear b/c it is just so damned good and interesting. but even w/out any dsi/sci gear in my studio, i'd still owe him a debt because his imprimatur can be found directly and indirectly on so many other developments that make it possible to have so much synth power at one's fingertips these days.

go dave(s)!!!
well put. :)
andromeda > polyevolver keyboard > ms-20 > oberheim two voice > arp 2600 > minimoog > custom modular system > polivoks > roland SVC-350 > jomox mbase01 > sh2 > acidlab > tr-808 > drumtrax > korg dvp-1 > protools hd3 > mac dual 2.0 G5

User avatar
code green
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 535
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 6:58 am
Gear: prophet 600/evolver/juno 6/alpha juno 2/bassst'n/crumar performer/jv1010/suitcase rhodes 73/ '78 gibson l6-s/'73 guild mahogany/'69 fender princeton
Band: thermite zapruder
Location: brooklyn

Post by code green » Thu Aug 16, 2007 6:59 pm

JUGEL wrote:
code green wrote:it seems clear that this is meant--like its forebear, the p5--to be a PLAYER'S synth,
ah players again... I know of many "non-player" artists that used the P 5 and the Pro-One.. they also played a major part in why analog came back into style in the first place.
yeah, and there are rock artists who, e.g., use an 808 in their recordings. so what? i'm not saying there aren't exceptions, i'm just giving my take on the primary intended market.

i think you're reading a value judgement into my invocation of players vs. studio-only users, workstation-needers, tweakers, collectors, etc....that just isn't there. not from me, anyway--at one time or another i wear and have worn all these hats.

User avatar
carbon111
Supporting Member!
Supporting Member!
Posts: 723
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 10:15 am
Band: Carbon111
Location: Pacific Northwest
Contact:

Post by carbon111 » Thu Aug 16, 2007 8:39 pm

Its interesting how this current thread and this one differ.

After the initial response, the divergence is very interesting. Over on KSS its all about the cost of making analog synths...here, its the featureset.
Best Regards, James
--
My New album "Persephone":

Carbon111 Website: http://www.carbon111.com

Carbon111 Blog: http://carbon111.blogspot.com

JUGEL
No Longer Registered

Post by JUGEL » Thu Aug 16, 2007 9:53 pm

It's creepy on the other side......

that prototype pic made my mind melt...

bigfoot-studios
No Longer Registered

Post by bigfoot-studios » Thu Aug 16, 2007 10:56 pm

Just a correction on the price - a new PEK can be bought for around $2300, the Prophet-8 will probably be around $1900. The PEK certainly isn't "50% higher". Also for those in the UK if you expect it to sell for the same price as in the states you are dreaming. I would expect 1500 pounds ($3000). How much are new PEKs there?

As far as multitimbral if Dave could include it on a cheap synth like the SixTrak in 1984 I don't see why he couldn't have included it now.

User avatar
code green
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 535
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 6:58 am
Gear: prophet 600/evolver/juno 6/alpha juno 2/bassst'n/crumar performer/jv1010/suitcase rhodes 73/ '78 gibson l6-s/'73 guild mahogany/'69 fender princeton
Band: thermite zapruder
Location: brooklyn

Post by code green » Thu Aug 16, 2007 11:22 pm

bigfoot-studios wrote:Just a correction on the price - a new PEK can be bought for around $2300, the Prophet-8 will probably be around $1900. The PEK certainly isn't "50% higher". Also for those in the UK if you expect it to sell for the same price as in the states you are dreaming. I would expect 1500 pounds ($3000). How much are new PEKs there?

As far as multitimbral if Dave could include it on a cheap synth like the SixTrak in 1984 I don't see why he couldn't have included it now.
what did the 6-trk retail for, back in the day? i have no idea--just curious.

steveman
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 335
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 4:08 pm

Post by steveman » Fri Aug 17, 2007 12:52 am

clusterchord wrote:looking at last few pages, if you are a moderator on VSE, does that mean you can use words like "bullshit", "f**k" and "shut up" more freely ??

i've never seen a mod on any forum use such language. Tallow r u power-tripping' or what's happening?

cmon, manners and calm first. do what u have to do if u think its just, but don't get personal.
While I agree with Tallows comments on the thread, I do agree with you over the mods use of language. Don't think it does the forum any service. Of all the techy forums I visit this is the only one that allows the use of such language, and it makes it seem fairly amateur to me. Also think it shows a lack of respect to other users.
I wouldn't want my kids seeing this language when all they wanted to find out about was synths. (and pls don't start about how they hear it in the playground all the time...).
I can't really understanding why ppl go to the trouble of typing it either, saying it is one thing but actually bothering to type it? There are exceptions when it really needs to be used, but just using it randomly in general posting?
JMO.

User avatar
Yoozer
Expert Member
Expert Member
Posts: 1390
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 1:31 pm

Post by Yoozer » Fri Aug 17, 2007 12:57 am

One thing I'd really love to know would be how this one stacks up to the Jupiter 8 or 6.

Yeah, I know, Micron vs. MicroKorg, but hey, it could be a very attractive alternative-but-still-somewhat-alike for the rest of us :).
"Part of an instrument is what it can do, and part of it is what you do to it" - Suzanne Ciani, 197x.

Post Reply