GForce Sequential Prophet-5

[D-Fusion]

You really need 85 Prophets to make music, though.

That wasnt my point

But my point is I HAVE THE POWER!!!

That means i can use easily 5 prophets that i can't buy without needing to record anything, play in real time along with other plugins

The power of the Prophets

[SoftSynthLover99]

I don’t know why it’s so hard for some to understand that “close enough” is not always desirable. Not every musician wants to compromise sound and workflow for convenience.

Who said anything about compromising sound or workflow ?

The power of software is low cost and efficiency within the parameters of modern computing. But to get that efficiency and CPU stability, you take a hit in sound quality/accuracy.

If it's indistinguishable in a mixed and mastered deliverable like a CD, MP3, played by end users on their car stereos, home stereos, or phone and air pods you have not taken any hit on sound quality or accuracy. You buy this plugin and the Rev 4 hardware to get the sound of the vintage units and both of them pull it off equally as well

The Prophet 5 rev 4 doesn't sound exactly like the vintage units, something Dave Smith acknowledged which is why he included the vintage knob in its design, so if you are using Rev 4 hardware you have already taken a hit in sound quality and accuracy

So for some players who are actually good at playing, hardware is definitely more convenient at times. Instead of freezing/bouncing tracks I just record straight in with no cost to my CPU.


So no, the $150 plugin (which is awesome btw) will not give you the same experience of a real Prophet rev4 in your studio.

Yet if you are good at playing (and I consider my self good at playing) why would you compromise and lose the MPE capabilities of the plugin? The hardware only has channel after touch that's a giant step backwards

I also don't find hardware more convenient at all, in fact it's extremely inconvenient on stage and in the studio as it takes up physical space and would have to be lugged around, beyond that it eats eats up thousands of dollars and is inconvenient financially.

A Prophet 5 rev 4 costs $3600 and only has a single layer with 5 voices of polyphony and no MPE

The plugin costs $150 has two layers with up to 10 voices and has MPE so why would anyone who considers themselves to be a player want to take the giant step backwards and go backwards with the hardware? You could also go Prophet 10 hardware and spend even more money of course but still as a player you wouldn't be getting MPE no thanks

You want to talk about compromising workflow, how about giving up the ability to use MPE to go hardware? From a sound design workflow perspective the hardware Rev 4 relies on a fixed architecture with one global LFO and a Poly Mod section (routing the Filter Envelope and Oscillator B to three specific destinations). The GForce software adds dedicated LFOs and Envelopes for almost every synthesis parameter on the panel. So by going hardware you are comprising workflow and sound design options

The control surface of the Prophet 5 is pretty basic, and easily fits into a universal subtractive synth layout you can establish with your MIDI Controllers that will provide you with the hands on knobby interface the hardware has if that's your thing

If you want the dedicated layout just get one of these

Screenshot_20260619-122806.jpg

As far as CPU hits that shouldn't be a problem for anyone who can afford a $3600 piece of hardware as you can also afford to get a good computer with a good CPU and lots of RAM. Should be noted that you can use that same computer with all your plugins and it's not dedicated to just a Prophet 5

Beyond that if you are still having CPU issues take some of the $3400 you are saving with the plugins and buy a second computer and optionally an additional interface. You can get good ones of both if you want and still have thousands left over. You can stash that anywhere and run multiple copies of it and any other plugin on the secondary "DSP Server" and send MIDI to it from your DAW and audio back to your DAW through the interface exactly as you would with the hardware. Only you have more polyphony, MPE and it's multitimbral and can be used for all your plugins without any CPU hit. You can also use something like the Audio Gridder software and do it all digitally through a network and not need an interface and you can multiple instances that will all get a separate core. A huge advantage for heavy CPU soft synths

One final thought, I don’t know why it’s so hard for some to hardware users to understand that the compromises you have to make with hardware are not always desirable when it comes to using hardware. Not every musician wants to compromise sound, workflow, money and convenience just to go hardware but you do you and spend thousands more for no real world advantage. I love that for you

If you want hardware awesome use it, no one cares but just know when it comes to the Prophet 5 and wanting the sound of the vintage units paying thousands more for the Rev 4 hardware is a giant step backwards over the software and it's not even close. So be honest that you want hardware and that's the only reason why

I'll agree with you that if I was going for a hardware Prophet I would not choose the Prophet 5 for that amount of money. I would probably rather use u-he repro instead of a Prophet 5 to be fair because of the limited voice count.

But I would absolutely choose a Prophet 10 rev4 if I had the option over any of the plugins currently available including this one from GForce. That doesn't mean the plugins are bad, just means that the Prophet 10 rev4 is just that good I would be stupid not to use it if I had the budget, space and synth knowledge to get the most out of it.

Also it's possible to get MPE controllers to work with hardware synths and eurorack modular setups. So depending on the hardware you wouldn't lose MPE functionality choosing hardware if you must have it. MPE to me is a bit overrated but that's a different topic.

[IvyBirds]

And take into consideration that there is no controller fitting perfectly unless you put time into assigning/programming one for your own needs...

SFC-5, Pro-800, and Fourm come to mind.

Beyond the fact that those controllers exist as you mentioned, what's always amazing to me is the people who one the one hand claim that having physical knobs and faders on a control surface for a synth is so vitally important, and then on the other hand say they can't be bothered to spend 10 minutes setting up a controller

They say "I have to have knobs and faders, and it's so important to me I will spend thousands to have them, but I can't be bothered to spend 10 minutes or less setting up a controller with MIDI Learn

It took me all of 5 or 6 minutes, and Gforce makes this super easy because there is a dedicated CC Mapping utility that permanently locks all of these in globally so you set it up once and never have to worry about it again

The Novation Launch Control XL MK3 is absolutely perfect for this in every way

[SoftSynthLover99]

Yep, it happens sometimes. But it's something the hardware gate-keepers don't want to admit, especially after spending $4,000 on a synth that is matched on par by a $150 software, The pill can be hard to swallow

In the case of a real rev 4 the $4000 synth isn't matched by $150 software (I realize this response wasn't to a comment about the rev 4 but still relevant).

Does it sound 100% exactly the same? No

Does it sound more than close enough? Absolutely

I don’t know why it’s so hard for some to understand that “close enough” is not always desirable. Not every musician wants to compromise sound and workflow for convenience.

The power of software is low cost and efficiency within the parameters of modern computing. But to get that efficiency and CPU stability, you take a hit in sound quality/accuracy. Soft synths are made to run inside your DAW alongside tons of mixing effects and other virtual instruments so it’s never gonna deliver the full sound of hardware because doing so would render your CPU practically useless for actually making music.

So for some players who are actually good at playing, hardware is definitely more convenient at times. Instead of freezing/bouncing tracks I just record straight in with no cost to my CPU.

So no, the $150 plugin (which is awesome btw) will not give you the same experience of a real Prophet rev4 in your studio.

We are all different and some prefer Hardware and other people prefer Software or a mix of both and some have to have the Original Vintage Hardware because they don't find the Remakes to be as good as the Original.

What makes you happy when you are ready to make music is what is the most Important part....

Yep

Just wish when the youtube marketers did comparisons of the software vs hardware they actually used the hardware properly. Because you'd hear how the software is really really different than the hardware. Some of the tones, movement and detuning from some of Matt's patches just don't translate well to the software versions. In fact although he is a fantastic keys player, I’ve never heard software sound like that at all
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xM1PRJPce ... TA%3D&ra=m

[Uncle E]

The Novation Launch Control XL MK3 is absolutely perfect for this in every way

Agreed! Use the faders for envelopes!

[beely]

Agreed! Use the faders for envelopes!

100% - My Launch Control XL for instrument plugin editing:-
(Standard layout across all my plugins where applicable)
Top row - Oscillator controls
Second Row - Filter controls
Third Row - Macro and general controls
Faders - Filter & Amp Envelopes

[abernathy]

The Novation Launch Control XL MK3 is absolutely perfect for this in every way

Agreed! Use the faders for envelopes!

Does GForce P5 have mode for endless encoders - where parameter doesn’t jump?

[kritikon]

Look, here's the cold hard truth. If you make music (which is primarily what I've been doing for almost 50 years) none of the listeners out there give a shit what synth you used on your song. All they care about is if they like the song or not. If they don't like the song, you could use the best P-5 emulation or hardware unit for that matter and it don't mean shit. Who cares?

The majority (not all) of the people who nit pick about this shit either don't make music or are deluded into thinking that their listening audience can tell what synth they used or, for that matter, care.

That's why when I watch all these conversations about DACs and Unison and blah, blah, blah, I roll my eyes with boredom and bewilderment. Because again...

Who out there gives a shit?

If I like the way a synth sounds, regardless oof whether or not its "faithful" to the hardware, I buy it.

Utterly irrelevant non-sequitur. The immediate response is - why should I give a shit about whether listeners out in the wild can tell the difference? They're not the ones using the sw or hw. Despite your protestation to the opposite I don't think I've ever come across ANYONE who buys hw because they think the customers prefer that sound. That is patently made up by you. They buy hw because for whatever reasons they prefer using it as one of their tools to make their music.
So right back at you - who cares? I could care less than shit about what a music listener thinks about what instruments are used. I doubt it enters their head how it's made.

"If I like the way a synth sounds, regardless oof whether or not its "faithful" to the hardware, I buy it."
Yet you don't think any hw user should use exactly the same criteria their own music. As a predominantly hw user I will tell you for fact that I buy hw exactly for the same reasons. I like the way they sound. I don't buy hw synths when I don't like the way they sound. It's EXACTLY the same for me as for you, but for some reason I'm not supposed to let my ears do their work because I should be buying the sw you prefer
Every single one of your arguments apply to me buying hw as it applies to you buying sw.

I will tell you for fact I can tell the difference between most sw plugins and most analogue hw. It's light and day often. And I don't care if other people with shit ears can't hear it - they're not the ones using my particular synths, making the particular music I make. And as far as fanatical - all I've seen in this tread is sw fanatics slagging off anyone daring to use hw, not the other way around - us hw users generally are quite happy using both hw and sw and it's not an issue. Why is it an issue for you?

[kritikon]

Look, here's the cold hard truth. If you make music (which is primarily what I've been doing for almost 50 years) none of the listeners out there give a shit what synth you used on your song. All they care about is if they like the song or not. If they don't like the song, you could use the best P-5 emulation or hardware unit for that matter and it don't mean shit. Who cares?

The majority (not all) of the people who nit pick about this shit either don't make music or are deluded into thinking that their listening audience can tell what synth they used or, for that matter, care.

That's why when I watch all these conversations about DACs and Unison and blah, blah, blah, I roll my eyes with boredom and bewilderment. Because again...

Who out there gives a shit?

If I like the way a synth sounds, regardless oof whether or not its "faithful" to the hardware, I buy it.

Utterly irrelevant non-sequitur. The immediate response is - why should I give a shit about whether listeners out in the wild can tell the difference? They're not the ones using the sw or hw. Despite your protestation to the opposite I don't think I've ever come across ANYONE who buys hw because they think the customers prefer that sound. That is patently made up by you. They buy hw because for whatever reasons they prefer using it as one of their tools to make their music.
So right back at you - who cares? I could care less than shit about what a music listener thinks about what instruments are used. I doubt it enters their head how it's made.

"If I like the way a synth sounds, regardless oof whether or not its "faithful" to the hardware, I buy it."
Yet you don't think any hw user should use exactly the same criteria for their own music. As a predominantly hw user I will tell you for fact that I buy hw for exactly the same reasons. I like the way they sound. I don't buy hw synths when I don't like the way they sound. It's EXACTLY the same for me as for you, but for some reason I'm not supposed to let my ears do their work because I should be buying the sw you prefer
Every single one of your arguments apply to me buying hw as it applies to you buying sw.

I will tell you for fact I can tell the difference between most sw plugins and most analogue hw. It's light and day often. And I don't care if other people with shit ears can't hear it - they're not the ones using my particular synths, making the particular music I make. And as far as fanatical - all I've seen in this tread is sw fanatics slagging off anyone daring to use hw, not the other way around - us hw users generally are quite happy using both hw and sw and it's not an issue. Why is it an issue for you?

Actually I'll happily get around to demoing this Prophet, as I find GForce to be purveyors of excellent gear. I would probably prefer to use this plugin than a real Prophet - mainly because I don't find Prophets that inspiring. TBH I haven't heard anything so far that make me go wow for any Prophet. I find them in the same pile as Oberheims - soft, sloppy, non-aggressive, what I'd call on the warm side (not a compliment) on the whole. Certainly capable of making good sounds if you like that style. But vanilla. So I doubt I'll buy it, not bcause of quality but because my subjective taste find these kind of synths pretty boring.

[kritikon]

EDIT double post

[wagtunes]

Look, here's the cold hard truth. If you make music (which is primarily what I've been doing for almost 50 years) none of the listeners out there give a shit what synth you used on your song. All they care about is if they like the song or not. If they don't like the song, you could use the best P-5 emulation or hardware unit for that matter and it don't mean shit. Who cares?

The majority (not all) of the people who nit pick about this shit either don't make music or are deluded into thinking that their listening audience can tell what synth they used or, for that matter, care.

That's why when I watch all these conversations about DACs and Unison and blah, blah, blah, I roll my eyes with boredom and bewilderment. Because again...

Who out there gives a shit?

If I like the way a synth sounds, regardless oof whether or not its "faithful" to the hardware, I buy it.

Utterly irrelevant non-sequitur. The immediate response is - why should I give a shit about whether listeners out in the wild can tell the difference? They're not the ones using the sw or hw. Despite your protestation to the opposite I don't think I've ever come across ANYONE who buys hw because they think the customers prefer that sound. That is patently made up by you. They buy hw because for whatever reasons they prefer using it as one of their tools to make their music.
So right back at you - who cares? I could care less than shit about what a music listener thinks about what instruments are used. I doubt it enters their head how it's made.

"If I like the way a synth sounds, regardless oof whether or not its "faithful" to the hardware, I buy it."
Yet you don't think any hw user should use exactly the same criteria their own music. As a predominantly hw user I will tell you for fact that I buy hw exactly for the same reasons. I like the way they sound. I don't buy hw synths when I don't like the way they sound. It's EXACTLY the same for me as for you, but for some reason I'm not supposed to let my ears do their work because I should be buying the sw you prefer
Every single one of your arguments apply to me buying hw as it applies to you buying sw.

I will tell you for fact I can tell the difference between most sw plugins and most analogue hw. It's light and day often. And I don't care if other people with shit ears can't hear it - they're not the ones using my particular synths, making the particular music I make. And as far as fanatical - all I've seen in this tread is sw fanatics slagging off anyone daring to use hw, not the other way around - us hw users generally are quite happy using both hw and sw and it's not an issue. Why is it an issue for you?

Are you done? For crying out loud. Use hardware if that's what you want to use. Just don't think you're using hardware makes you superior to those of us who don't. And by the way, I probably owned more hardware synths between 1977 and 2014 than you'll ever own in your whole lifetime. What I don't miss is the repairs and all the other baggage that goes with hardware. I would never return to an all hardware studio if you put a gun to my head.

[kritikon]

You're specifically the one who has the chip on his shoulder. I haven't mentioned once being better than you for using hw. In fact, nobody else has either, but you seem to keep hearing it inside your own head. I guess it's an inferiority complex or somesuch, I don't really care but stop putting words into our mouths. You're making this all up.

Whoopee doo, you've owned shitloads of hw. So have I. Actually I've owned shitloads of sw too. Is it a competition?

[IvyBirds]

The Novation Launch Control XL MK3 is absolutely perfect for this in every way

Agreed! Use the faders for envelopes!

Encoder Row 1 (Oscillators):
1.)Osc A Freq 2.)Osc A PW 3.)Osc B Freq 4.)Osc B Fine 5.)Osc B PW 6.)Glide/Unison 7.)Vintage Drift 8.)Master Vol

Encoder Row 2 (Filter & Modulation):
1.)Filter Cutoff 2.)Resonance 3.)Env Amount 4.)Kbd Tracking 5.)LFO Freq 6.)LFO Waveform 7.)Noise Vol 8.)Feedback Amount

Encoder Row 3 (Poly-Mod & Wheel Matrices):
1.)PolyMod Filt Dest 2.)PolyMod OscA Dest 3.)PolyMod FiltEnv Src 4.)PolyMod OscB Src 5.)Wheel Filt Amt 6.)Wheel OscA Amt 7.)Wheel OscB Amt 8.)Wheel LFO Amt

Faders 1–4: Filter Envelope ADSR
Faders 5–8: Amp Envelope ADSR

Buttons (Performance & Layer Routing):

Row 1: [Layer A Mute] [Layer B Mute] [Layer Mode: Split] [Layer Mode: Layer] [Arp On/Off] [Arp Latch] [Chord Mode] [FX 1 Bypass]
​Row 2: [MPE Toggle] [Velo to Filter] [Velo to Amp] [AT to Filter] [AT to LFO] [Hold/Sustain] [Vintage Mode Toggle] [FX 2 Bypass]

User Bank 2

Encoder Row 1 (X-LFOs & Modifiers):
1.)X-LFO 1 Freq 2.)X-LFO 1 Depth 3.)X-LFO 2 Freq 4.)X-LFO 2 Depth 5.)Mod Target 6.)Mod Target 2 7.)Mod Target 3 8.)Mod Target 4

Encoder Row 2 (X-Envelopes & Utilities):
1.)X-Env 1 Atk] 2.)X-Env 1 Dec 3.)X-Env 2 Atk 4.)X-Env 2 Dec 5.)Pan Layer A 6.)Pan Layer B 7.)Detune Layer 8.)Global Tune

Encoder Row 3 (Effects & Performance Layout):
1.)FX 1 Time/Param 2.)FX 1 Mix 3.)FX 2 Time/Param 4.)FX 2 Mix 5.)Vibrato Depth 6.)Glide Speed 7.)Spread 8.)[Layer Balance/Crossfader

Faders (Performance Control):
Faders 1–4: Hardware Macros 1-5, Fader 5) Expression CC11, Fader 6) Aftertouch Master Override) Fader 7)FX 1 Decay/Feedback, Fader 8.):FX 2 Reverb Tail/Decay

Buttons (Performance & Layer Routing):
Row 1: [Layer A Mute] [Layer B Mute] [Layer Mode: Split] [Layer Mode: Layer] [Arp On/Off] [Arp Latch] [Chord Mode] [FX 1 Bypass]
Row 2: [MPE Toggle] [Velo to Filter] [Velo to Amp] [AT to Filter] [AT to LFO] [Hold/Sustain] [Vintage Mode Toggle] [FX 2 Bypass]

That takes roughly 10 minutes to do in the Gforce Prophet 5 software and it's a do it once kind of deal. Pretty much everything is programmed across the entire plugin

The beauty is you can still use your mouse for everything, and because you are using MIDI CCs you can program extra knobs on your keyboard controller for the same MIDI CCs to control say your filter as you play

If you spend an additional 10 minutes in the Novation Components Software you can label everything for the OLED screen and you don't even need to look at the computer monitor if you don't want to. You can then save the entire thing in the Components software and load it whenever you want to control the Gforce Prophet 5. Because everything is laid out logically you will very quickly get muscle memory for everything

It also just takes 2 of the available 15 user slots so you can use the 13 other slots and just flip back and forth without using the components software if you choose

[234north]

Yep, it happens sometimes. But it's something the hardware gate-keepers don't want to admit, especially after spending $4,000 on a synth that is matched on par by a $150 software, The pill can be hard to swallow

In the case of a real rev 4 the $4000 synth isn't matched by $150 software (I realize this response wasn't to a comment about the rev 4 but still relevant).

Sure it is. The $150 plugin in this case can do everything the hardware can. Need the sound of a prophet 5 in a track or in the stage? The $150 plugin will be just fine

Does it sound 100% exactly the same? No but the Rev 4 hardware also doesn't sound 100% like the vintage units

Does it sound more than close enough? Absolutely

The vintage rev 3 doesn't 100% sound like the vintage rev 2 either. I get the idea from some of the comments here that some consider the rev 4 to be a "remake" or some such. It's not a remake any more than the rev 3 is a remake of the rev 2.

But my point isn't about the sound. Where does one get all of the...ahem...hardware with the software Only half joking. The hardware is about as premium as it gets. If that doesn't matter to you bully for you and it's nice to have the plugin. But no, the full experience of using the hardware isn't matched by the software and a generic controller.

And just to say, some of us who can play really don't care about MPE. Nice that the plugin supports it? Sure but I for one don't give a hoot about MPE.

[IvyBirds]

The hardware is about as premium as it gets. If that doesn't matter to you bully for you and it's nice to have the plugin. But no, the full experience of using the hardware isn't matched by the software and a generic controller.

Awesome but it should be premium for what it costs

As a player I also don't consider a 61 key keyboard to be as premium as it gets. It's an octave or two to small for that

and the keyboard itself is just a Fatar 61 keybed. Very nice for sure but lots of MIDI Controllers and Synths have the same keyboard. My 88 key Montage M blows it away however

And you are correct the full experience of using the hardware isn't matched by the software and a generic controller. It completely blows away the hardware because it does way more and can be configured exactly how you want it to be configured. If you really want physical controls why would you not want the best experience possible? Why would you settle for whatever Sequential think you should have laid out the way they think you should use them

For example ​On almost every synthesizer designed in the last 40 years, the signal flows logically from left to right: Oscillators ➔ Mixer ➔ Filter ➔ Amplifier.
​On the Prophet-5 hardware, the Mixer section is physically wedged between Oscillator A and Oscillator B. This means you tweak the tuning controls for Oscillator B on the left, but its volume knob is located up and to the right. It completely breaks the natural left-to-right muscle memory you get from just about every other synth.

Take a close look at the Filter section the Filter Envelope and the Amplifier Envelope are stacked vertically on top of each other: Top Row: Cutoff, Resonance, Env Amount, and then the Filter ADSR controls.Bottom Row: The Amplifier ADSR controls directly underneath. Because they are identical-looking knobs stacked right on top of each other, it is incredibly easy during a live gig to accidentally grab the Amplifier Decay when you meant to grab the Filter Decay. Modern layouts almost exclusively place the two envelopes side-by-side horizontally to give them distinct visual zones to avoid this issue

On the hardware panel, there isn’t a dedicated, labeled section explicitly called "LFO." Instead, the main LFO is hidden away in the Wheel-Mod section on the far left. If you want to change the LFO waveform or frequency, you have to look for the "Wheel Mod" section. This makes sense from a 1978 engineering perspective (because the LFO was routed directly to the mod wheel), but modern players expect a dedicated LFO block right next to the oscillators.

Even Dave Smith changed this relic of 1978 engineering in his newer Synths so I don't know why you want that in 2026 or that it's as premium as it gets