TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- Little Phatty Questions
Pages (7): « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 »

quote:

Originally posted by Eric J Moog Voyager (RME) Pros: Sounds fantastic, real Moog. Cons: 3K is a lot to spend for a monosynth. Being a monosynth limits is versatility somewhat. Basses, FX and mono leads.

The typical street price on the RME is only $2295.

quote:

Originally posted by Eric J DSI Poly Evolver Pros: Poly, analog. Sounds good. Cons: None ??? Does anyone own one of these? I dont see it talked about much.

I have a Poly Evolver Rack (and a Mono Evolver Keyboard) and I actually like it a lot, BUT, a lot of people buy these thinking that, because it's analog (& digital) that it is going to be a great synth for basses and leads. That's not really what their strengths are. They really excel at more crazy sounds and, despite being an analog/digital hybrid, some of their best and most unique sounds come out of the digital side IMO. The evolver series have an interesting architecture in that they give you 4 oscillators - 2 digital and 2 analog - and you have a lot of routing capabilities, including the ability to assign each oscillator to a different track on its 4-track step sequencer, giving you some crazy multi-part sequences or 4-way evolving (hence the name) sounds/textures at the press of one key, depending on what you're using the step sequencer to modulate (all modulation destinations are available to the SS). One of its biggest weaknesses IMO is that it only has 4 voices, which limits it for pads/strings. But, like I said, it's not exactly designed for conventional synth sounds and that's the reason for a lot of people's disappointment with it.

quote:

Originally posted by Eric J DSI Prophet 08 Pros: Cheap, poly, analog, 8 voice. COns: Questionable build quality? Heard people call it "lifeless" and cold (two things you dont want in an analog synth). Is the PEK a better option from DSI?

Lifeless and cold? No way. Maybe in the hands of someone who doesn't know how to program a synth, or just flips through some of the presets. As far as build quality goes, some people don't like the feel of the rotaries on it and some people have experienced problems with weirdness in their response when turning them rapdily, but that's primarily an issue for live users (i.e., you typically will dial in/refine the automation you want in your sequencer anyway). Also, DSI just released the "Pot Edition", which replaces the continuous rotary knobs with pots - the reviews seem to be very favorable, but I haven't seen or used one. So, if you're thinking DSI and want an all-around synth, the P08 is a much better choice than a PEK IMO.

The Tetra is essentially a stripped down P08 (but, with sub-oscillators, no external input, etc.) or a 4-voice Mopho - in other words, it's definitely NOT the best synth in the DSI lineup. The P08 has twice as many voices and two layers - even without the subosc's, the P08 is a much more versatile synth, as is the PEK/PER.

quote:

Originally posted by cryophonik The typical street price on the RME is only $2295.

That's right. I keep forgetting about the RME version.

quote:

Originally posted by cryophonik I have a Poly Evolver Rack (and a Mono Evolver Keyboard) and I actually like it a lot, BUT, a lot of people buy these thinking that, because it's analog (& digital) that it is going to be a great synth for basses and leads. That's not really what their strengths are. They really excel at more crazy sounds and, despite being an analog/digital hybrid, some of their best and most unique sounds come out of the digital side IMO. The evolver series have an interesting architecture in that they give you 4 oscillators - 2 digital and 2 analog - and you have a lot of routing capabilities, including the ability to assign each oscillator to a different track on its 4-track step sequencer, giving you some crazy multi-part sequences or 4-way evolving (hence the name) sounds/textures at the press of one key, depending on what you're using the step sequencer to modulate (all modulation destinations are available to the SS). One of its biggest weaknesses IMO is that it only has 4 voices, which limits it for pads/strings. But, like I said, it's not exactly designed for conventional synth sounds and that's the reason for a lot of people's disappointment with it.

OK, that makes sense. For a first analog poly, this might not be the right choice for me, but I can see where this would be advantageous if I already had a few outboard pieces and was looking to add something different.

quote:

Originally posted by cryophonik Lifeless and cold? No way. Maybe in the hands of someone who doesn't know how to program a synth, or just flips through some of the presets. As far as build quality goes, some people don't like the feel of the rotaries on it and some people have experienced problems with weirdness in their response when turning them rapdily, but that's primarily an issue for live users (i.e., you typically will dial in/refine the automation you want in your sequencer anyway). Also, DSI just released the "Pot Edition", which replaces the continuous rotary knobs with pots - the reviews seem to be very favorable, but I haven't seen or used one. So, if you're thinking DSI and want an all-around synth, the P08 is a much better choice than a PEK IMO.

I have seen the same reviews, and even people looking to retrofit their P08's with the new pots. I had this synth on my radar for a while, but I started dropping money on other more essential items (monitors, DA, etc.), then forgot about it. I originally was planning on picking up the keyboard version. I was going to replace my Novation SL61, which I am not thrilled with. It's good to hear someone with experience with it give a favorable review.

It is interesting your and Alan's differing views on this one. I find a lot of strong opinions on this unit on GS, but I always take those with a grain of salt. Some of those GS guys act like every synth sucks except a $10K modular. I'm going to go back and listen to the demos again.

The main problem is that I can't really try any of these out for myself. My local GC is...well, it's GC, so they specialize in selling everything except high-end. I have played with a Voyager, a TI (briefly) and the LP, at GC but thats about it. They don't carry things like the Andromeda, P08 or Evolver lines on the floor. That pretty much reduces me to reliance on Internet demos and other peoples' opinions.

You'd think there would be a high end gear dealer locally in the Dallas/Ft Worth area, but I have yet to find one. If one ever pops up, I'd be sure to make fast friends!

quote:

Originally posted by cryophonik The Tetra is essentially a stripped down P08 (but, with sub-oscillators, no external input, etc.) or a 4-voice Mopho - in other words, it's definitely NOT the best synth in the DSI lineup. The P08 has twice as many voices and two layers - even without the subosc's, the P08 is a much more versatile synth, as is the PEK/PER.

But it's up to 4 part multi timbrel! I'd MUCH rather have two Tetras than a P08. But I'd rather have 4 Pulses or a Q than anything from DSI.

The problem with the knobs is an annoying one. It's easy to fix, though. They provide a tube of gunk called Deoxit which you then apply to the encoders.

quote:

Originally posted by alanzo Plus side to the Omega is it's a rack. I wish the Andy was a rack rather than a behemoth keyboard. Several aspects of the Andy weren't well thought out.

i like this demo of the omega 8

http://www.studioelectronics.com/as.../omegamanM2.mp3

I think me and Cryo's, Dave's, opinions differ on the Prophet '08 simply because we look for different things with our synths. I didn't like the Prophet because it was really not very good for the phat gritty basselines I like to make. The demos previously posted in this thread are my standard, go-to basslines and the Prophet sounded like shit with these. Very muddy low-end and a cheap high-end.

But, it was really really good with soft plucks and leads. Even supersaw leads. If you listen to my tracks on MySpace, the main leads in the Vapor and Melbourne remix were the same patch. A Prophet '08 supersaw lead. But I am still glad I sold my Prophet '08 because the Andy is at least as good, most of the time better, at everything the Prophet '08 can do.

I should probably be more specific in my hardware thread. I think I'll put in a few extra comments right now ....

quote:

Originally posted by alanzo I think me and Cryo's, Dave's, opinions differ on the Prophet '08 simply because we look for different things with our synths. I didn't like the Prophet because it was really not very good for the phat gritty basselines I like to make. The demos previously posted in this thread are my standard, go-to basslines and the Prophet sounded like shit with these. Very muddy low-end and a cheap high-end. But, it was really really good with soft plucks and leads. Even supersaw leads. If you listen to my tracks on MySpace, the main leads in the Vapor and Melbourne remix were the same patch. A Prophet '08 supersaw lead. But I am still glad I sold my Prophet '08 because the Andy is at least as good, most of the time better, at everything the Prophet '08 can do. I should probably be more specific in my hardware thread. I think I'll put in a few extra comments right now ....

OK, that does clarify things quite a bit. I was thinking of a poly for pads, poly leads, and sequence elements. I can understand why the P08 might not be good for bass, especially if it is missing a sub-osc. The combo of a good poly like the Andy or P08 with a good monosynth (LP, Voy, Pulse), might just give a well rounded sonic palette.

Right now I think I'm leaning toward the Andy, simply based on the demos and reviews from other people, but that is very subjective at the moment. There is a demo on YouTube with the Andy playing U2, WTSHNN intro and it sounds phenomenal. I did find that Alesis sells refurb units for like $2,500, so I may go that route to save a few bucks, should I decide to pick one up. I have a bit of time to think about it.

Are you considering only analog synths? Why not look into the NL3. I know both me and Cryo love that synth.

I can throw the NL3 into the comparison lot if you'd like .... I'd have to do some specific ones with the NL3 in, though, since the NL3 has only two oscs. The only thing I don't like about it.

quote:

Originally posted by alanzo Are you considering only analog synths? Why not look into the NL3. I know both me and Cryo love that synth. I can throw the NL3 into the comparison lot if you'd like .... I'd have to do some specific ones with the NL3 in, though, since the NL3 has only two oscs. The only thing I don't like about it.

I had an NL3 about 2 years ago and sold it. Its not like I didn't like it, it just never really fit into my sound. It is entirely possible that I just didn't spend enough time with it. That being said, I know a LOT more now than I did then. I have considered getting it back again, but I am thinking analog simply because my analog emulations are where I am sourcing most of the sounds I'm looking for. SO I figure if I am going to add outboard, go analog because it is capable of producing the sounds I want.

quote:

Originally posted by orTof�nChiLd i like this demo of the omega 8 http://www.studioelectronics.com/as.../omegamanM2.mp3

Kind of a crappy demo, but the Andy can definitely do sounds that are very similar.

quote:

Originally posted by alanzo Kind of a crappy demo, but the Andy can definitely do sounds that are very similar.

if my tune gets signed, i'll buy an andy

I almost didn't post this because I was considering picking it up myself, but I've got too many synths as it is:

http://www.vintagesynth.com/forum/v...php?f=9&t=50378

He's in Texas, Eric - I know it's a huge state, but maybe he's within driving distance, even if you just want to check one out.

Wow, thanks for pointing me to this.

quote:

Originally posted by Eric J Wow, thanks for pointing me to this.

No problem. Please buy it so I can stop thinking about it!

quote:

Originally posted by cryophonik No problem. Please buy it so I can stop thinking about it!

Yeah, I'm probably not going to pick this one up, so feel free to pick it up.

I've been going through the manual of the A6. Boy is that thing complex! I had heard this before, but I had no idea until I started going through the manual. I'm thinking that I may want to get something a little easier to program before I attempt to dive into the A6. Part of this is getting to be a better programmer, so I'd hate to start off with something so complex that I get frustrated.

Alanzo, I randomly found your demo vid for your patches for the Prophet 08, and I thought they sounded really good. I know its through YouTube, but the patches sounded good and gave me a good feel for what the synth was capable of. I could definitely hear some of the analogue "character" even through YouTube.

I would still definitely recommend the Tetra over the Prophet '08. They can be chained together to form an eight voice instrument which would be sonically and capably identical to the Prophet '08 with the addition of sub OSCs and multi-timbrel functionality for each voice.

I'm noticing that the Minimonsta has a hard time with square waveforms. There's lots of phasing when all 3 oscs are square and at the same octave. Even with two OSCs enabled on Minimonsta there is a lot of audible phasing. This is part of how the Minimonsta can sound more modern, but in this instance it's undesirable.

The Voyager tackles this no problem. I'm also comparing it to the Arturia Minimoog now which doesn't have a hard time with the squares. So in that aspect, Arturia's is much closer to the real thing.

Saw OSCs sound great on all three.

BUT Minimonsta much more closely nails the Voyager's envelopes and filters. The arturia minimoog has a weird round decay, curved up (exponential) whereas the voyager and minimonsta are much more snappier and curved down (linear).

Arturia's OSCs will sometimes sound better, but the envelope completely kills the instrument. Minimonsta wins out in the end.

K, here is some audio. First is a demo of the Voyager vs Arturia vs Minimonsta (in that order). Hopefully you can hear why I don't like Arturia's Minimoog. Arturia's instrument can sound a lot better than this, but I was trying to emphasize why I don't like its envelopes.

http://www.amonvision.com/aspnet_client/7.mp3

Next we have a good' ol analog round-up. Minimonsta, Andromeda, Voyager, Pulse (in that order). It's interesting how much alike the Minimonsta and Andromeda sound. That may be worth looking into further.

http://www.amonvision.com/aspnet_client/8.mp3

Actually... they all sound pretty damn similar. Probably just the patch. It's a pretty basic one. Let's see if I can't put together something more complex.

quote:

Originally posted by alanzo I would still definitely recommend the Tetra over the Prophet '08. They can be chained together to form an eight voice instrument which would be sonically and capably identical to the Prophet '08 with the addition of sub OSCs and multi-timbrel functionality for each voice.

Really? Interesting. The thing that has been keeping me away from the mopho and the tetra is the lack of dedicated controls. How much menu diving is necessary on these units?

quote:

Originally posted by alanzo I'm noticing that the Minimonsta has a hard time with square waveforms. There's lots of phasing when all 3 oscs are square and at the same octave. Even with two OSCs enabled on Minimonsta there is a lot of audible phasing. This is part of how the Minimonsta can sound more modern, but in this instance it's undesirable. The Voyager tackles this no problem. I'm also comparing it to the Arturia Minimoog now which doesn't have a hard time with the squares. So in that aspect, Arturia's is much closer to the real thing. Saw OSCs sound great on all three. BUT Minimonsta much more closely nails the Voyager's envelopes and filters. The arturia minimoog has a weird round decay, curved up (exponential) whereas the voyager and minimonsta are much more snappier and curved down (linear). Arturia's OSCs will sometimes sound better, but the envelope completely kills the instrument. Minimonsta wins out in the end.

In my experience the Minimonsta is grittier and dirtier. Those who own the hardware (Voyager or Model D) say the Minimonsta is much more faithful to the original hardware. Thats great for bass and other mono sounds, but I have also found the the polyphonic aspect of the Arturia emulation sounds really good with things like strings. I am finding myself using the Arturia emu for poly sounds and the Minimonsta for basses and mono leads. Still, I am basically using the Minimonsta more than the Arturia emu.

quote:

Originally posted by alanzo K, here is some audio. First is a demo of the Voyager vs Arturia vs Minimonsta (in that order). Hopefully you can hear why I don't like Arturia's Minimoog. Arturia's instrument can sound a lot better than this, but I was trying to emphasize why I don't like its envelopes. http://www.amonvision.com/aspnet_client/7.mp3

Totally hear what you mean. I had not really noticed this before you brought it to my attention, but then again, I wasnt doing side-by-side comparisons.

quote:

Originally posted by alanzo Next we have a good' ol analog round-up. Minimonsta, Andromeda, Voyager, Pulse (in that order). It's interesting how much alike the Minimonsta and Andromeda sound. That may be worth looking into further. http://www.amonvision.com/aspnet_client/8.mp3

I actually liked the sound of the Minimonsta more than the Andromeda in that clip, but the Voyager trumped them both, IMO.

Some more testing of the filter. The Pulse seems to be quite overdriven. I looked into everything and that's just how the filter sounds. Minimonsta is holding up quite well. And I gotta say that I hope I can get more out of the Voyager to make it worth the price per voice. Order: Minimonsta, Andromeda, Voyager, Pulse.

http://www.amonvision.com/aspnet_client/9.mp3

Does anyone know why there is a difference in sound when i switch from mono to poly on Minimonsta?

quote:

Originally posted by alanzo Does anyone know why there is a difference in sound when i switch from mono to poly on Minimonsta?

Some legato thing ?

http://www.amonvision.com/aspnet_client/10.mp3

Something a bit more practical. Minimonsta, Voyager, Andy. The andy definitely has a more metalic tone whereas there is practically no difference between the Minimonsta and Voyager.

However, I have noticed that the Minimonsta does not quite emulate the snapyness of the Voyager's envelopes. VERY close, though. I also WISH WISH they would allow you to tweak the release on the Amp and Filter. I guess they were trying to make it like the Model D, though. I'm also not a huge fan of the Minimosta interface. It works, though.

After all these comparisons, I am considering selling my Voyager to be replaced by a copy of Minimonsta, Odysee, Jupiter 8v and Cubase 5. We'll see, though. I really hate the limited control of Minimonsta. No control over release and not being able to do poly unison patches. It's definitely no replacement for the Andy, but may do well for Voyager basslines.

The pulse won't go anywhere, though. I still really like its gritty tone in most instances. The Andy is also such a beast : http://www.amonvision.com/aspnet_client/11.mp3

quote:

Originally posted by Eric J Really? Interesting. The thing that has been keeping me away from the mopho and the tetra is the lack of dedicated controls. How much menu diving is necessary on these units?

If you want to program sounds from scratch, there is a lot of menu-diving required with either of these two synths. However, they both come with a free software editor from Soundtower, which is actually very nice and intuitive. The way I worked with my Mopho was that I'd program sounds using the software, then make liberal use of the 4 assignable mod knobs for each patch to allow a wide range of real-time tweaking from the front panel (along with the dedicated front panel knobs). That's workable, but it's nowhere near as hands-on as a P08, PEK, or MEK. Even the desktop Evolver with its matrix-style interface is quicker and more intuitive to program from its front panel than the Mopho and Tetra are.

quote:

Originally posted by cryophonik If you want to program sounds from scratch, there is a lot of menu-diving required with either of these two synths. However, they both come with a free software editor from Soundtower, which is actually very nice and intuitive. The way I worked with my Mopho was that I'd program sounds using the software, then make liberal use of the 4 assignable mod knobs for each patch to allow a wide range of real-time tweaking from the front panel (along with the dedicated front panel knobs). That's workable, but it's nowhere near as hands-on as a P08, PEK, or MEK. Even the desktop Evolver with its matrix-style interface is quicker and more intuitive to program from its front panel than the Mopho and Tetra are.

See, that's one of the big things in favor of picking up the P08 instead of a Tetra or Mopho. The hands-on tweakability is very tempting and way more inspiring than a mouse. Having dedicated controls for nearly every parameter makes things so much easier.

I hated having to dig through menus on my previous hardware synths, and it was a factor in my decision to sell them. My previous hardware was all VA and PCM, so there was always plenty of menu diving and none of them really sounded any better than my software equivalents anyway. The P08, and other true analogs, have mostly dedicated controls, and have an element to their sound and usability that I cannot reproduce with software.

Another big plus is I can have it double as my primary MIDI keyboard and that makes it a multi-tasker. I'm not really looking to have it serve as a bass synth, but more of a poly pad/lead/element synth.

Frankly, I'm starting to question if I even need to consider an outboard mono synth for bass, especially considering Alan's comparisons to the Minimonsta. I always knew how much I liked the Minimonsta, but I never knew how it stood up to the real thing, until now.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.