GForce Sequential Prophet-5

[wagtunes]

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?

You're the one who lumped me in with the software guys. I was just clarifying I am not. In fact, I am neither. I am just a musician who doesn't understand all this " this synth is better than that synth" crap. That's all. If it's important to you to have the best emulation of whatever or the best hardware of whatever, power to you. But these conversations bore the hell out of me and every single thread of every single synth ever made, hardware or software always devolves into these pissing contests.

I'm just tired of the whole "This filter is 1 millionth of a db off from the hardware. Who gives a shit?

Anyway, I'm done. I love this P-5. I love u-he's. I love Arturia's. And I don't strain my brain trying to figure out which one is the best. It's all subjective anyway.

[Uncle E]

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

Now do a drum machine layout.

[Neon Breath]

...But these conversations bore the hell out of me and every single thread of every single synth ever made, hardware or software always devolves into these pissing contests.

I'm just tired of the whole "This filter is 1 millionth of a db off from the hardware. Who gives a shit?

There is this wonderful forum feature that will free you from all this pain you have to endure:

[wagtunes]

...But these conversations bore the hell out of me and every single thread of every single synth ever made, hardware or software always devolves into these pissing contests.

I'm just tired of the whole "This filter is 1 millionth of a db off from the hardware. Who gives a shit?

There is this wonderful forum feature that will free you from all this pain you have to endure:

Except for once I'd like to talk about what the synth does. What it can't do. What bugs there are. Every thread that starts like that ends up as a "let's compare this to the hardware to see which is better" and nobody talks about the synth on its own anymore. So I have to end up going someplace else to get some useful information instead of this same old crap.

[abernathy]

...But these conversations bore the hell out of me and every single thread of every single synth ever made, hardware or software always devolves into these pissing contests.

I'm just tired of the whole "This filter is 1 millionth of a db off from the hardware. Who gives a shit?

There is this wonderful forum feature that will free you from all this pain you have to endure:

Except for once I'd like to talk about what the synth does. What it can't do. What bugs there are. Every thread that starts like that ends up as a "let's compare this to the hardware to see which is better" and nobody talks about the synth on its own anymore. So I have to end up going someplace else to get some useful information instead of this same old crap.

Then you might want to avoid discussions about “exact” emulations of hardware. Stick with Diva, etc. Same advice I’d give to folks that complain about limited features on a soft synth like this… go use Zebra or something instead!

[wagtunes]

...But these conversations bore the hell out of me and every single thread of every single synth ever made, hardware or software always devolves into these pissing contests.

I'm just tired of the whole "This filter is 1 millionth of a db off from the hardware. Who gives a shit?

There is this wonderful forum feature that will free you from all this pain you have to endure:

Except for once I'd like to talk about what the synth does. What it can't do. What bugs there are. Every thread that starts like that ends up as a "let's compare this to the hardware to see which is better" and nobody talks about the synth on its own anymore. So I have to end up going someplace else to get some useful information instead of this same old crap.

Then you might want to avoid discussions about “exact” emulations of hardware. Stick with Diva, etc. Same advice I’d give to folks that complain about limited features on a soft synth like this… go use Zebra or something instead!

Except I've bought this synth. I'd like to use it and since I never owned a Prophet, I'd like to know what it's capable of doing. Maybe some things I'd never figure out on my own not having any knowledge of the hardware unit.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

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

Some good points here. But some of the cons of the hardware are overstated too IMO.

The hardware panel is huge. The knobs are huge and chunky. There's a LOT of space in between controls. Especially when compared to modern hardware synths and MIDI controllers. I've never accidentally grabbed the wrong envelope knob. Maybe that would be an issue on the desktop version, but not the keyboard.

I'll even add some complaints: the buttons are a relic. They feel good, but they'll get wonky and not work. The solution is "there's probably just some dust in there, press the button a bunch of times and it'll resolve itself". It's happened only a few times and always resolved itself via lots of pressing. But I don't have any other hardware so prone to this. I also wonder how serviceable the synth will be in 20 years time considering the SMD components and lack of individual voice boards. With the cost, serviceability is a real concern for me.

But you're not wrong about the LFO or some of your other design points, but it was meant to be a modern reissue of a vintage synth with just a few extra features tacked on. They couldn't change the LFO too much. People would've said, "not a Prophet-5/10". I think the massive success of the hardware, even despite the price, shows that there was a huge market for it and Sequential/Dave Smith (RIP) got it right on the Rev 4.

But the hardware looks and feels premium to a degree that I didn't appreciate until unboxing the thing. I just love looking at it. Using it is a pleasure. The knobs feel amazing. The whole experience of using that thing is 5 out of 5 stars for me.

But I think the software is pretty darn close sound wise. And the price? I mean, I just picked it up for $71 USD. That's an awesome price for the all the convenience of software and something like 90% of the sound of the hardware, with a whole bunch of added features.

As a partial aside, I make a lot of ToneX profiles of my guitar amps. I do hear a difference when I A/B them. But ToneX gets almost all the way there, with just minor differences, and adds a ton of convenience. Both things have different pros and cons, but I like having both real amps and little virtual versions of them.

[Uncle E]

Except I've bought this synth. I'd like to use it and since I never owned a Prophet, I'd like to know what it's capable of doing. Maybe some things I'd never figure out on my own not having any knowledge of the hardware unit.

The things that set it apart from other Prophet plugins are the XMOD, layers, Rev button, Vintage knob, and Modulation panel, plus GForce's always excellent presets. The things that set Prophets in general apart from other poly analogs are the Poly-Mod, Wheel-Mod, and multiple oscillator shapes, otherwise they're fairly standard in terms of capabilities. Lastly, a lot of famous Prophet sounds are made using sync.

[zerocrossing]

In a mix, none of you could tell the difference.

I'm getting tired of this influencer lingo.

Buy it, even if you can't tell a difference compared to any other synth out there.

Maybe this is how you mix , you mask everything with 12 plugins so listeners can't tell which synth you used... or you layer everything in which case no synth character is apparent so you can use whatever you have...

Also we can tell the difference comparing with all the rest P5 emulations but vs the hardware no one can the tell the difference, it's magic i tell you , trust me bro!!

And i bet you couldn't tell a difference from GF bass station vs GF P5 , no mix needed.

Btw you forgot to tell us if you can hear the difference , instead you try explain what others hear or not, gee thanks for letting us know!

It is true that if you're loading up your synth with effects, slight differences do get lost in a mix, even if they're apparent on their own. Little saturation, little stereo chorus and some reverb, and a somewhat flat sounding plugin can come to life. I've heard plenty of Wag's tracks, and sound quality isn't ever his issue, so whatever he's doing in that department, it's working.

I personally like to have the best I can afford, but I'm also looking at features and work flow. I don't like the hardware workflow as much, so I'm always looking for something with a plugin editor. I also use MPE a lot, and polyphonic aftertouch, so that narrows down what will work for me, even in software. I tried that Acustica Prophet 5 emulation, and right off the bat I couldn't get it the MPE to work right, and no aftertouch, so that's off the table, even if it is better. I didn't even bother doing any a-b tests. It just doesn't do what I need it to do. So, while sound quality is important to me, it's also got to have the right feature set for me too.

Lately, I've been putting some of my old songs together, and they don't have a synthesizer focus. Frankly, software has been fine for that and I've not yet found a use for any of my hardware instruments. No one's remarked on the fact that I used the Knifonium plugin and it didn't sound as good as the hardware Knifonium. The actual comments I've gotten are about the drums (samples) and guitars (real, into plugin amp modelers and effects). They've all been very positive. Would I get an even better result with a real drum kit and real guitar amps? Maybe, but what I'm doing seems to be well received.

[wagtunes]

Except I've bought this synth. I'd like to use it and since I never owned a Prophet, I'd like to know what it's capable of doing. Maybe some things I'd never figure out on my own not having any knowledge of the hardware unit.

The things that set it apart from other Prophet plugins are the XMOD, layers, Rev button, Vintage knob, and Modulation panel, plus GForce's always excellent presets. The things that set Prophets in general apart from other poly analogs are the Poly-Mod, Wheel-Mod, and multiple oscillator shapes, otherwise they're fairly standard in terms of capabilities. Lastly, a lot of famous Prophet sounds are made using sync.

Thanks. Now THAT was helpful.

[IvyBirds]

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

Now do a drum machine layout.

That's easy assume you have 8 parts if you need more you would have the same exact setup on a different bank in groups of 8

Row 1 (Top) PITCH / TUNE for each one
Row 2 (Middle) DECAY
Row 3 (Bottom) COLOR / FILTER: Typically mapped to a high-pass filter for hats/percussion, a low-pass filter for the kick/toms, or a drive/saturation parameter per channel
Faders 1–8 VOICE VOLUME/MIXER

Assignable Buttons (2 Rows of
Row 1 (Upper Buttons) MUTE Mapped to toggle track mutes. Configure the RGB LEDs to shine Bright Green when active and Dim Red when muted

Row 2 (Lower Buttons) SOLO / SELECT Mapped to solo elements during performance, or used to focus/select that specific drum pad for detailed editing in your DAW or hardware sampler.

Play / Stop / Record Buttons: Global sequencer transport

Note there is no onboard sequencer this is strictly for sound sculpting/design, also one of the rows of buttons could be alternatively programmed to MIDI notes so you could tap them to audition. I run this next to a Novation Launch Pad Pro MK3 which has 64 drum pads and an onboard sequencer

[TheMaestro]

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?

You're the one who lumped me in with the software guys. I was just clarifying I am not. In fact, I am neither. I am just a musician who doesn't understand all this " this synth is better than that synth" crap. That's all. If it's important to you to have the best emulation of whatever or the best hardware of whatever, power to you. But these conversations bore the hell out of me and every single thread of every single synth ever made, hardware or software always devolves into these pissing contests.

I'm just tired of the whole "This filter is 1 millionth of a db off from the hardware. Who gives a shit?

Anyway, I'm done. I love this P-5. I love u-he's. I love Arturia's. And I don't strain my brain trying to figure out which one is the best. It's all subjective anyway.

What an insult to musicians.

[wagtunes]

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?

You're the one who lumped me in with the software guys. I was just clarifying I am not. In fact, I am neither. I am just a musician who doesn't understand all this " this synth is better than that synth" crap. That's all. If it's important to you to have the best emulation of whatever or the best hardware of whatever, power to you. But these conversations bore the hell out of me and every single thread of every single synth ever made, hardware or software always devolves into these pissing contests.

I'm just tired of the whole "This filter is 1 millionth of a db off from the hardware. Who gives a shit?

Anyway, I'm done. I love this P-5. I love u-he's. I love Arturia's. And I don't strain my brain trying to figure out which one is the best. It's all subjective anyway.

What an insult to musicians.

I think most musicians spend more time actually making music than talking about this crap.

Or maybe that's just me.

[234north]

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

Agreed. And it is.

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

Huh? Number of octaves has nothing to do with whether a keybed is high quality or not. By that standard the Williams 88-key "piano" we bought for the kids ages ago is premium As a player you should know that the number of octaves has nothing to do with anything other than the...number of octaves. And a Bosendorfer Imperial Grand is better than a Steinway because it's got some extra keys too right? Lordy.

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

Your Montage M keybed isn't a synth action so "blows it away" isn't even a relevant comment. It's like saying the action in my Kawai digital upright blows away the keys on the P-5. Makes no sense. Prophet-5 is an analog synthesizer, not a workstation instrument built for piano players. (and for the record Fatar has multiple lines of 61-key actions).

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

Because they designed the instrument. Why should you "settle" for how your Montage M is laid out?

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.

I have no idea what you're talking about. On a rev 4 the flow is exactly as you noted above and any other synth I have. mod stuff on the left, oscillators, mixer, filter, amp. They all have slightly different layouts for the mixer knobs/sliders. The Cobalt-8 has the mix knob *in* the oscillator section.

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

I think you haven't looked closely at a Prophet-5 at all let alone the filter section...any rev. Amp envelope knobs are in a separate section to the right of the filter. You're describing the Trigon-6 and OB-6, not the rev 4 (or any rev P5).

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.

Again...not sure what you're on about but you're not describing a Prophet-5. The LFO most definitely has its own section on the left where wheel/polymod are.

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

The Prophet-5 rev 1 and rev 4 have the controls in the same places. I'd suggest you go take a look as what you're describing isn't a Prophet-5. Prophet-6 is almost the same as the rev 4. The better design decision there IMO is that the slop dial takes up the empty space to the left of oscillator A. I wish on the rev 4 they'd have put the vintage knob there but then it wouldn't match the layout going back to the rev 1.

and just to make sure we're clear on this: I own a rev 4 (and the GForce plugin)

[SoftSynthLover99]

...But these conversations bore the hell out of me and every single thread of every single synth ever made, hardware or software always devolves into these pissing contests.

I'm just tired of the whole "This filter is 1 millionth of a db off from the hardware. Who gives a shit?

There is this wonderful forum feature that will free you from all this pain you have to endure:

Except for once I'd like to talk about what the synth does. What it can't do. What bugs there are. Every thread that starts like that ends up as a "let's compare this to the hardware to see which is better" and nobody talks about the synth on its own anymore. So I have to end up going someplace else to get some useful information instead of this same old crap.

To learn what the SW can and can't do I personally enjoy listening to the HW that it models. I find it incredibly useful because truthfully we all know the software sounds different than the hardware no matter which brand you choose.

So what I do is try to reverse engineer the differences with plugins to get softsynths closer to the hardware. Some FX plugins I like for softsynths are UAD Verve or Goodhertz WOW Control or Tupe WOW to add some analog like movement. Can make things feel a bit more alive like hardware.

So I'm gonna try making some presets that I personally find lively/hardware-esque and see how close I can get it to some of the tones I enjoy and maybe other users can share presets they find useful here if that's allowed. Would love to recreate some of these from the hardware