Sequential Prophet 6 !!! NAMM 2015

Anything about hardware musical instruments.
Post Reply New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

Gonga wrote:
I have to say though, if anybody knows how to use digital circuits in analog synths, it's SC.
Agreed, that was always Dave's strength, well, that and being a fantastic product guy. He really knows how to milk engineering efforts across a product line.

Post

Shy wrote:You may be trying hard to tell yourself that the "underlying sound" (or infrasound) of envelope and LFO signals / waveforms is not part of the underlying sound of a synth. If someone believes that, it's most probably because they just don't know how sound works, or they choose to ignore it and believe otherwise. If you believe that Dave Smith who has been claiming that synths like Mopho have a "fully analog signal path" has not been misleading people, even though signals in the synth are generated in the digital domain (not to mention the whole DCO "debate" which I won't expand on in here) and there are DACs all over the signal path, that's fine, as I said, but it doesn't change the fact that he has.
The person who is misleading people is you, because you are inventing your own definitions which are different from what Dave Smith and other people actually mean. When Dave says "signal path" it refers to the components of the synth that produce or transmit the sound. It does not include the LFOs or envelopes, because they do not make sound - they can change the output of the VCOs, VCFs, and VCAs, but they do not generate audio. This is not a semantic distinction, they are control voltage generators, not audio signal processors. "Analog signal path" in this context means an audio signal - not a control voltage - which does not pass audio through an ADC or DAC. The Prophet 08, Tetra, MoPho and Prophet 6 are all capable of doing this.

There is no program of deception here. Dave is not trying to pretend his synths have no digital components, he's differentiating them from the Evolvers (which did not have an all-analog signal path) and virtual analogs (which are digital right up to the output DACs). If Dave was trying to mislead people he would just say that his synths were "all analog", but they aren't and he hasn't. He's been very clear about the fact that the modulators are digital (he just recently said that using analog envelopes was "stupid"). If you want to pretend the phrase "all analog signal path" means something different from the way that he is actually using it in order to fulfill some paranoid conspiracy theory go ahead, but don't blame other people for problems that exist only in your imagination. According to your idiosyncratic redefinition, the P5 and JP8 do not have "all-analog signal paths" either, by which point you've mutilated the language to the point that it has no useful meaning any more. Given the current high quality of digital envelopes and LFOs, and the difficulty of finding a polysynth which meets your purity standards, it's kind of a moot point anyway. But enough of the slander.

Post

ghettosynth wrote:So pedantry aside, I think that the bigger issue is how "all analog signal path" has become a positive attrribute for synths. Whether he's misleading people or not, to me, is far less of an issue than how misleading it was to use that phrase to avoid talking about the hybrid (i.e. NOT analog) oscillators in the Prophet 08 and spinoffs. That was seriously misleading and as a result, we have people expecting their synths to have "all analog signal paths" and that the phrase has some meaning.
Thank goodness you've abandoned pendantry. :roll:

The reason "all analog signal path" is a positive attribute is because of all the people losing their shit over the ADC/DAC stages in synths like the Evolver and Andromeda. In other words, the only reason that phrase even exists is to appease analog fundamentalists, which is clearly an exercise in futility.

Post

ghettosynth wrote:
Shy wrote:Envelope and LFO signals are fundamental in synths and effect most aspects of the sound, including pitch, amplitude and bandwidth. That's not arguable.
What is arguable, is whether or not modulators are considered "on the signal path?" I think that it's a reasonable point to exclude them. Now, there are some cases where having analog modulators contributes to the "analogness" of a synth, but, in general, you don't actually "hear" modulators, you hear their effect, yes, but, up to the point where we're talking about FM, you only hear modulator signals where there is bleedthrough.
I wouldn't call it an argument, because it's just a question with a definitive answer: modulators may or may not be considered to be on the signal path, but regardless of that, modulators actually are on the signal path. The main difference between a modulator and the signal it's modulating is that their wave generators' outputs are at different points on the signal path. In the digital domain, using functionally identical oscillators, it's possible to create an identical (to the bit) waveform by simply switching between the waveform that each oscillator generates. It's similar in the analog domain, except that the result can be perceivably identical at best, but usually just similar, due to physical constraints. You already know all of that, anyway.
"Music is spiritual. The music business is not." - Claudio Monteverdi

Post

News From The Sky wrote:
ghettosynth wrote:So pedantry aside, I think that the bigger issue is how "all analog signal path" has become a positive attrribute for synths. Whether he's misleading people or not, to me, is far less of an issue than how misleading it was to use that phrase to avoid talking about the hybrid (i.e. NOT analog) oscillators in the Prophet 08 and spinoffs. That was seriously misleading and as a result, we have people expecting their synths to have "all analog signal paths" and that the phrase has some meaning.
Thank goodness you've abandoned pendantry. :roll:

The reason "all analog signal path" is a positive attribute is because of all the people losing their shit over the ADC/DAC stages in synths like the Evolver and Andromeda. In other words, the only reason that phrase even exists is to appease analog fundamentalists, which is clearly an exercise in futility.
I know what people think, and why, but, "all analog signal path" seldom means much, as with DCOs and the P08. At best you can think of the P08 DCO as an all analog signal path being controlled by an audio rate modulator, although I have to roll my eyes a bit there.

To be clear, I don't care about an "all analog signal path", however, I do care about what's in the audio chain and why. I can remember quite a lot of fuss being made over the Kurzweil K2000's digital output not being an actual digital output because it was first converted to analog, fed through a digital effects unit (with its own AD/DA stages), and then reconverted back to digital. It was a valid complaint, of course, anyway, I digress.

Post

Analog envelopes and most music oscillators contain comparators which generate digital (two state) outputs. Therefore, not even analog EGs and OSCs are "pure analog". :)

Post

Does anyone remember if Moog got this much flak about the digital side of things when they released the Taurus 3, the Minitaur, the Sub Phatty, or the Sub 37? I'm asking because they all have digital LFO(s) and Envelope Generators, and most of them have some sort of digital tuning as well...

Post

I love that Dave Smith releases a modern dual-VCO analog polysynth with discrete circuits and SSM2040-inspired filters for under $3000 and some people would rather call him a liar and a snake oil salesman. Welcome to the internet, Josh Lyman.

Post

News From The Sky wrote:I love that Dave Smith releases a modern dual-VCO analog polysynth with discrete circuits and SSM2040-inspired filters for under $3000 and some people would rather call him a liar and a snake oil salesman. Welcome to the internet, Josh Lyman.
I want to vote this up many times. There is no deception I can see, all features of this synth are widely and clearly available from even the most cursory check of the promotional materials.

Post

:borg:

Post

Gearslutz called.

They want their thread back.

Post

eXode wrote:Does anyone remember if Moog got this much flak about the digital side of things when they released the Taurus 3, the Minitaur, the Sub Phatty, or the Sub 37? I'm asking because they all have digital LFO(s) and Envelope Generators, and most of them have some sort of digital tuning as well...
True that, and as I've stated before, my Moog Voyager Rackmount, with it's "all-analog signal path," sound like crap when pitch-bending because of it's midi implementation, which to this day has never been fixed.

Bottom line is, as it has always been...what does it sound like under varying real-world playing conditions?
ALL YOUR DATA ARE BELONG TO US - Google

https://soundcloud.com/dan-ling
http://danling.com

Post

Gonga wrote:
eXode wrote:Does anyone remember if Moog got this much flak about the digital side of things when they released the Taurus 3, the Minitaur, the Sub Phatty, or the Sub 37? I'm asking because they all have digital LFO(s) and Envelope Generators, and most of them have some sort of digital tuning as well...
True that, and as I've stated before, my Moog Voyager Rackmount, with it's "all-analog signal path," sound like crap when pitch-bending because of it's midi implementation, which to this day has never been fixed.

Bottom line is, as it has always been...what does it sound like under varying real-world playing conditions?
I'll venture a guess based on SC past synths that it will sound very, very good indeed, because they do digital really well.

Now if they would only offer some customization of the controls...
ALL YOUR DATA ARE BELONG TO US - Google

https://soundcloud.com/dan-ling
http://danling.com

Post

The main point for me is that Dave beat Roland, Korg, etc. to the punch by being first to wheel out a modern reinterpretation of an iconic '70s/'80s analog poly synth (and apparently did it right instead of designing something around those same CEM chips again). The others have been teasing and tickling with no revamped Polysix or Juno or Jupiter anywhere in sight. Dave jetted past all the foreplay and went straight for the Big O. I think we were starting to figure there'd be "pork in the treetops" before one of the big names finally did it.
http://www.davidvector.com
New album, Chasing Fire, out now on Amazon, iTunes, etc.
Bandcamp: https://davidvector.bandcamp.com/releases

Post

Aiynzahev wrote:With a MAP of $2700 I'm guessing made in the US like the Pro-2.

I didn't find that the Pro-2 was for me ultimately but I've always noticed DSI's build quality. Very good overall.

I am definitely going to try my best to get one of these. It's truly great thing that they finally gave us what we've been asking for. VCOs, poly, real rich sound. So excited about this.
Could you please go into what turned you off the Pro-2? I'm feeling the bug to pick up one or the P6 when it comes out (if I can find a place around here to try them out) and was curious.

Post Reply

Return to “Hardware (Instruments and Effects)”