Prophet 08 or Mopho x4?

[bendragon]

I hoenstly cannot decide between the two. The Prophet has 8 voices and an extra octave whilst the Mopho has 4 and 4 (respectively) - but the P08 is around £500 extra!

What are the actual differences between the two units sonically and architectually that would make me part with the extra cash for the Prophet? Is the Mopho just a cost reduced version with half the poliphony or am I missing something crucial here?

-Ben

[Ashe37]

the mopho x4 has a sub osc and filter feedback, just like a mopho.

[Stab Frenzy]

The P08 can do splits and layers though, which the Mopho can't.

[bendragon]

the mopho x4 has a sub osc and filter feedback, just like a mopho.

The sub oscs I knew of, but I (think) you can reduce the P08 to 4 voices and stack patches - so the sub-oscs could be replicated. The only real edition would be the feedback oscillator (that I somehow failed to notice!)

I'm starting to lean towards the Mopho x4 (if only on price), but I cant help but feel it would be a redundant purchase when I already own an MS2000, which is simmilar (albeit digital).

The P08 can do splits and layers though, which the Mopho can't.

Which confirms what I said above. I could replicate the sub-oscillators of the Mopho and end up with many of its sonic possibilities. Possibly more.


I really wish music shops in my local area stocked synthesizers; I'd love to get hands on with either of these units before plunging the cash. Alas, they only have a MicroKorg and a Roland SH on display - the rest of the shop is a sea of digital pianos.

[Stab Frenzy]

Layering a the same patch an octave down doesn't sound the same as having suboscs as the oscs aren't in sync and aren't going through the same filter modulation etc.

[bendragon]

Layering a the same patch an octave down doesn't sound the same as having suboscs as the oscs aren't in sync and aren't going through the same filter modulation etc.

I meant create a new patch to use as a Sub Osc, not double up the current patch.

If the Mx4 has the same oscillator, filter, amp and mod circuitry as the P8 with two extra features for sonic sculpting (Sub Osc and Feeback Loop) at a 1/3 less money, it’s a no brainer, really. Increased polyphony for pads and strings would be nice, but that’s what my M50 is for; and I've yet to hear a synthesizer with better pads and strings than a Korg M-series workstation.

[BaconTastesGood]

A huge chunk of the cost is in the sheer number of knobs on the P08. Keybed + extra knobs is worth the cost for some. If you don't care about those, then you could also consider just getting a Tetra desktop module and saving even more money.

Note that the used market for the P08 is trending towards buyers right now, with PE models going for about $1500 USD in very good condition, vs. $1300 for a new Mopho x4 (there is almost no used market for the Mopho x4 yet since it's new).

Also, the Mopho x4 is mono timbral, which may or may not be an issue.

[bendragon]

A huge chunk of the cost is in the sheer number of knobs on the P08. Keybed + extra knobs is worth the cost for some. If you don't care about those, then you could also consider just getting a Tetra desktop module and saving even more money.

Note that the used market for the P08 is trending towards buyers right now, with PE models going for about $1500 USD in very good condition, vs. $1300 for a new Mopho x4 (there is almost no used market for the Mopho x4 yet since it's new).

Also, the Mopho x4 is mono timbral, which may or may not be an issue.

I'm aware its mono-timbral but that doesn't concern me. I was considering a desktop module but I'm one of these people who can't stand desktop modules. I need something with keys.
Trawling eBay, all the second hand modules seem to be from the USA. I'd rather buy new from as UK retailer than pay postage and import duties for one of those to come all the way over here.

[Stab Frenzy]

Layering a the same patch an octave down doesn't sound the same as having suboscs as the oscs aren't in sync and aren't going through the same filter modulation etc.

I meant create a new patch to use as a Sub Osc, not double up the current patch.

It's still not synced and still not going through the same filter and modulation so it still doesn't sound the same as having suboscs.

[bendragon]

Layering a the same patch an octave down doesn't sound the same as having suboscs as the oscs aren't in sync and aren't going through the same filter modulation etc.

I meant create a new patch to use as a Sub Osc, not double up the current patch.

It's still not synced and still not going through the same filter and modulation so it still doesn't sound the same as having suboscs.

close approximation though. I use a simmilar technique with the MS 2000 for basslines.

[Stab Frenzy]

You actually get a much closer result to a subosc sound by syncing the two oscs of the one voice and having the synced osc (osc 1 on the Evolver, I imagine it's the same on the P08) set to square and an octave down. Having the subosc perfectly in sync is the key to that sound because they don't sound like adding another oscillator, they just change the waveform of the osc you already have.

I guess the MS2000 oscs might all be synced automatically because it's digital so you could get a similar result from either technique but on an analogue synth with freerunning oscs they need to be synced or it sounds quite different.

[bendragon]

You actually get a much closer result to a subosc sound by syncing the two oscs of the one voice and having the synced osc (osc 1 on the Evolver, I imagine it's the same on the P08) set to square and an octave down. Having the subosc perfectly in sync is the key to that sound because they don't sound like adding another oscillator, they just change the waveform of the osc you already have.

I guess the MS2000 oscs might all be synced automatically because it's digital so you could get a similar result from either technique but on an analogue synth with freerunning oscs they need to be synced or it sounds quite different.

This is true - I've not used many Analogue synthesizers (Juno 6/106 and Poly-61) so I'm not as clued up on Ana's as I'd like.

I actually just had a brainwave and I think I might go for it instead.
A Mopho Keyboard (just the original mono version) and then at a later stage, buy a tetra to poly-chain to it. I get 5-not polyphony at less than £100 more than the Mopho x4 in a much smaller package. The Mopho keyboard would be able to fit next to the blofeld keyboard on my stand - or I could even place it on my desk next to the Electribe.

[pflosi]

A Mopho Keyboard (just the original mono version) and then at a later stage, buy a tetra to poly-chain to it. I get 5-not polyphony at less than £100 more than the Mopho x4 in a much smaller package. The Mopho keyboard would be able to fit next to the blofeld keyboard on my stand - or I could even place it on my desk next to the Electribe.

That's what I did (before knowing that the MophoX4 would come out). Some additional advantages with this configuration: your 5-voice poly is now fully multitimbral with individual outputs for all five voices. Furthermore, you have two units that you can also use separately if you wish so. On the downside: you need an additional mixer for polychaining, as the Mopho Kbd is much louder than the Tetra (I suspect because with five voices you need more headroom). You cannot just turn down the volume on the Mopho Kbd with its volume knob, since in polychain mode the volume knob controls the volume of all slaved units (and you'll obviously want the Mopho Kbd to be the master with these two units). So really, a small submixer is needed IMO.

[bendragon]

That's what I did (before knowing that the MophoX4 would come out). Some additional advantages with this configuration: your 5-voice poly is now fully multitimbral with individual outputs for all five voices. Furthermore, you have two units that you can also use separately if you wish so. On the downside: you need an additional mixer for polychaining, as the Mopho Kbd is much louder than the Tetra (I suspect because with five voices you need more headroom). You cannot just turn down the volume on the Mopho Kbd with its volume knob, since in polychain mode the volume knob controls the volume of all slaved units (and you'll obviously want the Mopho Kbd to be the master with these two units). So really, a small submixer is needed IMO.

I could probably get a little battery powered gutar mixer for less than £30 and connect an AC adapter to the 9v batter connector. That's what I used to do before I could afford a full sized mixer. It worked well despite a major electrical hum when using the supplied AC adapter (hence the 9v battery connector trick).

Though, quick question - are the stereo outputs on the MoPho and Tetra really needed? Is it only some built in panning effect that uses the stereo output? If not really needed then I wont need a second mixer, I would just set channels 7 and 8 to mono rather than a stereo pair on my Lexicon IONIX and alter the volumes using the pots on the mixer. Connect the Mopho to channel 7, Tetra to channel 8. I could then load them as two mono channels in logic pro and fire them towards a stereo bus with the appropriate effects for the mix.

On a side note, I really should stop buying synthesizers and go buy a higher capacity mixer to support them all.

[pflosi]

Though, quick question - are the stereo outputs on the MoPho and Tetra really needed? Is it only some built in panning effect that uses the stereo output? If not really needed then I wont need a second mixer, I would just set channels 7 and 8 to mono rather than a stereo pair on my Lexicon IONIX and alter the volumes using the pots on the mixer. Connect the Mopho to channel 7, Tetra to channel 8. I could then load them as two mono channels in logic pro and fire them towards a stereo bus with the appropriate effects for the mix.

No, not needed - at least I do not need them at all. It's just for panning, pan is one of the modulation destinations in the matrix. I personally never use that, if I want pan automations I do it in the DAW. Especially on the DSI stuff where no cool tricks a la voice spread (as is possible on a very rudimentary level with the A6) are possible, but mostly boring LFO->Pan... YMMV, but I don't need the stereo outs.

Obviously, when you record stuff / for studio work this is not an issue at all - you could also adjust the levels after recording (in the DAW), so not even needed to do it on the I-ONIX. I was more talking about live situations (I bought this combo almost exclusively for live use)... For those situations, I really want a submixer - since sending them to the same bus on one big mixer is also not cool IMO, because you need to adjust all sends and EQs on both original channels. Only a submixer helps here IMHO.