MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index
 FAQ & Terms of UseFAQ & Terms Of Use   Wiggler RadioMW Radio   Muff Wiggler TwitterTwitter   Support the site @ PatreonPatreon 
 SearchSearch   RegisterSign up   Log inLog in 
WIGGLING 'LITE' IN GUEST MODE

Pro 2 is officially retired!
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> General Gear Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next [all]
Author Pro 2 is officially retired!
Sinamsis
dubonaire wrote:
With all the new and interesting FPGA synths coming I wonder if this is something Dave Smith is looking at.


Very good point, though TBH, I don't totally understand how FPGA differs from DSP from a practical aspect. I've only briefly read on it to be honest. But I do wonder if it's something that is novel only in theory, but in application is indistinguishable from DSP. I'm not saying this is the case, but the cynic in me always questions these things. The FPGA based UDO Super 6 seems awesome, but I can't say it's because it's FPGA. Haha, I think there's a good chance that the nuances are lost on me.

Regardless, I'm sure whatever Sequential come out with next (and I do think they'll have something to replace this synth), it will be wonderful.

And as an aside, despite being a DSI fanboy, I briefly owned a Tempest and hated it. It would be interesting to see them revisit this, but it would have to be fairly compelling for me to take the plunge. I was not one of those early adopter who feel they were short changed by DSI because they never implemented sample import. I just couldn't stand the workflow, particularly sample browsing. The Prophet X on the other hand is a joy to work with.
dubonaire
Sinamsis wrote:
dubonaire wrote:
With all the new and interesting FPGA synths coming I wonder if this is something Dave Smith is looking at.


Very good point, though TBH, I don't totally understand how FPGA differs from DSP from a practical aspect. I've only briefly read on it to be honest. But I do wonder if it's something that is novel only in theory, but in application is indistinguishable from DSP. I'm not saying this is the case, but the cynic in me always questions these things. The FPGA based UDO Super 6 seems awesome, but I can't say it's because it's FPGA. Haha, I think there's a good chance that the nuances are lost on me.


The basic aspect is the FPGAs can be a lot faster and everything can be done within the FPGA. And if you use an FPGA you don't really need to make something just a monosynth.

This is what Novation says about the Peak:

Quote:
Central to Peak is the use of a high-powered processor component called a Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA). In contrast to traditional DSP chips, which often need to run in pairs or quads, the FPGA is a single processor on which many functions can run — from oscillators to the modulation matrix. The key benefit to an FPGA is that it runs at a much higher rate than DSP-based technology, and this has a direct impact on the clarity of sound.

Each of Peak’s eight voices has an independent oversampling digital-to-analogue converter (DAC). These DAC’s are oversampling at over 24MHz (24 million times per second), using a simple RC (resistor-capacitor) filter on their output in the analogue domain. In itself this is not new technology, but their integration inside the FPGA has enabled their design to be extended to enable optimum waveform synthesis. Because other virtual synths use discrete ‘off the shelf’ DAC chips, which are restricted to running at sample rates of either 48kHz or perhaps 96kHz, they often have aliasing issues, especially when synthesising higher frequencies. Peak’s ability to generate waveforms at the oversampling frequency — up to 512 times the traditional rate — ensures that Peak’s waveforms are pure at all frequencies, free from digital artifacts no matter how aggressively the pitch is modulated.
Sinamsis
dubonaire wrote:
Sinamsis wrote:
dubonaire wrote:
With all the new and interesting FPGA synths coming I wonder if this is something Dave Smith is looking at.


Very good point, though TBH, I don't totally understand how FPGA differs from DSP from a practical aspect. I've only briefly read on it to be honest. But I do wonder if it's something that is novel only in theory, but in application is indistinguishable from DSP. I'm not saying this is the case, but the cynic in me always questions these things. The FPGA based UDO Super 6 seems awesome, but I can't say it's because it's FPGA. Haha, I think there's a good chance that the nuances are lost on me.


The basic aspect is the FPGAs can be a lot faster and everything can be done within the FPGA.

This is what Novation says about the Peak:

Quote:
Central to Peak is the use of a high-powered processor component called a Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA). In contrast to traditional DSP chips, which often need to run in pairs or quads, the FPGA is a single processor on which many functions can run — from oscillators to the modulation matrix. The key benefit to an FPGA is that it runs at a much higher rate than DSP-based technology, and this has a direct impact on the clarity of sound.

Each of Peak’s eight voices has an independent oversampling digital-to-analogue converter (DAC). These DAC’s are oversampling at over 24MHz (24 million times per second), using a simple RC (resistor-capacitor) filter on their output in the analogue domain. In itself this is not new technology, but their integration inside the FPGA has enabled their design to be extended to enable optimum waveform synthesis. Because other virtual synths use discrete ‘off the shelf’ DAC chips, which are restricted to running at sample rates of either 48kHz or perhaps 96kHz, they often have aliasing issues, especially when synthesising higher frequencies. Peak’s ability to generate waveforms at the oversampling frequency — up to 512 times the traditional rate — ensures that Peak’s waveforms are pure at all frequencies, free from digital artifacts no matter how aggressively the pitch is modulated.


Nice. I believe I have read that aliasing is less, which makes sense now. Ha, I personally like aliasing, but I understand why others do not. And I guess it's nice that it's a more efficient technology. I have an Antelope interface, and they love to advertise the FPGA based plugins... I can't say they sound any better than the DSP based UAD plugins haha. But there's a lot of variables there, of course. But it's made me balk a little bit every time I hear FPGA. In this application it very much makes sense.

So a little more on topic, with the Prophet 12 gone, and now Pro 2, I really feel they must be getting ready for something else. I guess the Prophet X could be looked at as the direct descendant of the Prophet X, but at best it's a cousin. It's a very different philosophy and architecture. They've had a wavetable based synth in their lineup for over 15 years now. If they came out with a polyphonic wavetable synth that allow import of user waves, or at least more options, and with different filters (PX filters would be fine) I would say it would be a big improvement for me. The Pro 2, however, I'm not sure how you'd improve on that. I mean, I'm sure there are small things. But over all, even with current offerings, I feel like it's a very compelling machine.
thetwlo
dubonaire wrote:
With all the new and interesting FPGA synths coming I wonder if this is something Dave Smith is looking at.

I doubt it, he deals in chips, this was a very specialized synth, and many balked at the price for not being poly. He put everything he thought should be in a mono.
It's not for many, but it's likely the best synth he made. It's the "minimoog" of today. (of course not in sound)
dubonaire
thetwlo wrote:
dubonaire wrote:
With all the new and interesting FPGA synths coming I wonder if this is something Dave Smith is looking at.

I doubt it, he deals in chips, this was a very specialized synth, and many balked at the price for not being poly. He put everything he thought should be in a mono.
It's not for many, but it's likely the best synth he made. It's the "minimoog" of today. (of course not in sound)


Well I wouldn't be too sure. No one expected the Prophet X.

I always wanted to get a Pro 2, I just can't get it in the country I live in and shipping is too much.
SweetNuthin
anselmi wrote:
SweetNuthin wrote:
As a proud owner of a Pro 2, i would loooove a Pro x with two analog Vco and 2 Digital/sample oscillator


this would be closer to the mono evolver than the pro-2 though

for me the great thing about the Pro-2 is the paraphony capability, so I´d go with this concept in a Pro-x...4 paraphonic "X" voices would be killer...and a second multimode filter, of course!


well but wouldn't be cool to have a 4 voice paraphonic synth with every voice different? i don't know how musical it would be, but it would be really funny
anselmi
SweetNuthin wrote:
anselmi wrote:
SweetNuthin wrote:
As a proud owner of a Pro 2, i would loooove a Pro x with two analog Vco and 2 Digital/sample oscillator


this would be closer to the mono evolver than the pro-2 though

for me the great thing about the Pro-2 is the paraphony capability, so I´d go with this concept in a Pro-x...4 paraphonic "X" voices would be killer...and a second multimode filter, of course!


well but wouldn't be cool to have a 4 voice paraphonic synth with every voice different? i don't know how musical it would be, but it would be really funny


I´d love this trick with arpeggiators, you know, the old mono/poly thing, but also like block chords and stabs so I´d prefer sample-based generators where you can load ANY sound and then perform the same trick at the cost of just leave out analog oscillators

but, if they keep the Prophet-X architecture intact in a Pro-X, then you´ll have a sample based engine AND the modelled oscillators available at the same time, per voice, so I think this should cover what you want easily
h4ndcrafted
Have the sales been good, could it be it just wasn’t selling anymore ?
dubonaire
h4ndcrafted wrote:
Have the sales been good, could it be it just wasn’t selling anymore ?


Yeah I presume for most synths the sales curves have a big peak then a long tail.

There is also quite a lot of competition for monosynths even if it was paraphonic.
anselmi
dubonaire wrote:
h4ndcrafted wrote:
Have the sales been good, could it be it just wasn’t selling anymore ?


Yeah I presume for most synths the sales curves have a big peak then a long tail.

There is also quite a lot of competition for monosynths even if it was paraphonic.


yep
at the time it was released there was very little competition...even now it´s hard to find a synth with such a wide range of features...but now, for the price of a new Pro-2 you have a lot of stuff that can be combined together to bring a lot of options, mostly cheap semi-modular and hybrid stuff

a Minilogue XD or even a Microfreak, combined with an analog semi-modular and some nice pedals and you have a killer setup for much less than the retail price of the Pro-2...maybe you don´t tick all the areas but I´m sure that with a little research you could

a Pro-2 replacement product today should be something groundbreaking that packs a lot of features into a solid synth that would be hard to find otherwise, like the Pro-2 was when released

I think that the sample-based engine and nice analog filters of the PX could be the way to go...it´s a very attractive package but maybe the format is not for everybody, and some of this flavor reborn into a more compact synth should find a place in lot of studios
wiperactive
Just had a thought... it would be nice if the potential follow-up had a sequencer and dynamics addressable filter bank as part of its armoury similar to that in the new Flame unit.
h4ndcrafted
anselmi wrote:
dubonaire wrote:
h4ndcrafted wrote:
Have the sales been good, could it be it just wasn’t selling anymore ?


Yeah I presume for most synths the sales curves have a big peak then a long tail.

There is also quite a lot of competition for monosynths even if it was paraphonic.


yep
at the time it was released there was very little competition...even now it´s hard to find a synth with such a wide range of features...but now, for the price of a new Pro-2 you have a lot of stuff that can be combined together to bring a lot of options, mostly cheap semi-modular and hybrid stuff

a Minilogue XD or even a Microfreak, combined with an analog semi-modular and some nice pedals and you have a killer setup for much less than the retail price of the Pro-2...maybe you don´t tick all the areas but I´m sure that with a little research you could

a Pro-2 replacement product today should be something groundbreaking that packs a lot of features into a solid synth that would be hard to find otherwise, like the Pro-2 was when released

I think that the sample-based engine and nice analog filters of the PX could be the way to go...it´s a very attractive package but maybe the format is not for everybody, and some of this flavor reborn into a more compact synth should find a place in lot of studios


Yes, a cut down, or more mono-centric version of the PX would be a no brainer for me. I have opted for a montage/modx over the X because that is too many eggs in one basket for me frankly. Plus the sample manipulation is better, but you lose the analogue filter and sample space, not to mention the more esoteric sample library.

Sadly you can’t modulate sample start on the yamahas, can you do that on the X ?
WilDFire
So for those of us who have drooled over one for years...do you think prices will go down or up on the secondhand market?
dubonaire
WilDFire wrote:
So for those of us who have drooled over one for years...do you think prices will go down or up on the secondhand market?


That could depend on if and what Sequential replace it with.
Panason
I'm really old school. Will Dave Smith make a comeback with a Patriarch, as the natural follow-up to the Prophet and a response to moog's "diversity" bollox?

maybe a Grandfather too. lol
dkcg
WilDFire wrote:
So for those of us who have drooled over one for years...do you think prices will go down or up on the secondhand market?


I paid about half retail for mine, keep your eyes peeled. I see them listed for around $1400-1500, but haven't seen any sell for that price, seems like actual going rate is around $1200. I paid $1050, I wasn't sure about it, but grabbed cash, drove for an hour in pouring rain, and came home with it. Used, but more like open box "new" condition. I lucked out, haven't seen any that cheap since.

All the CV outputs makes it very tempting to get back into euro.
drowld
anselmi wrote:

a Pro-2 replacement product today should be something groundbreaking that packs a lot of features into a solid synth that would be hard to find otherwise, like the Pro-2 was when released


Yes that's mainly the reason why i and some other aren't getting one. Also it was never made in a desktop/tabletop format.
There are loads of mono and for this price you can buy either many good monos and a seq or a nice eurorack selection of modules which may get you there.

I would buy a P2x in desktop format. Like a p12 with the x filters and the p2 seq. Even if it was mono/para. Even if there was only 1 filters for all the voice
The seq seemed really nice on the p2. And p12 oscillators flexibility is also really nice
dubonaire
drowld wrote:
anselmi wrote:

a Pro-2 replacement product today should be something groundbreaking that packs a lot of features into a solid synth that would be hard to find otherwise, like the Pro-2 was when released


Yes that's mainly the reason why i and some other aren't getting one. Also it was never made in a desktop/tabletop format.
There are loads of mono and for this price you can buy either many good monos and a seq or a nice eurorack selection of modules which may get you there.

I would buy a P2x in desktop format. Like a p12 with the x filters and the p2 seq. Even if it was mono/para. Even if there was only 1 filters for all the voice
The seq seemed really nice on the p2. And p12 oscillators flexibility is also really nice


WTF are you talking about?
drowld
dubonaire wrote:

WTF are you talking about?


wot dude ?
dubonaire
drowld wrote:
dubonaire wrote:

WTF are you talking about?


wot dude ?


Sorry! Could not understand your post last night. Guinness ftw!
WilDFire
I imagine Dave will come out with a 6 voice poly with a mod matrix out the wazoo and a big sequencer as well because no other product interfaces with modular like the pro2.

The sad thing is the price point seems to be 2k or above for anything he makes these days, but hey, R&D costs money...
calaveras
It'd be neat if they split the difference and did something like the Mopho X4 with CV out.
Mostly I just like smaller synths. The bigger ones take up so much space it's tough to keep buying them.
anselmi
WilDFire wrote:
I imagine Dave will come out with a 6 voice poly with a mod matrix out the wazoo and a big sequencer as well because no other product interfaces with modular like the pro2.


4 voice paraphony based on the Prophet-X engine is my guess. With twin filters, sequencer and CV outs, just like the Pro-2. This should be more logical than a 6 voice synth that could cannibalize their other 6 and 8 voice products

also: Dave always reshape his own technology into different formats, so once developed, the Prophet X sample engine should go into different products easily...this could be the case

and maybe it´s time for a new groovebox based on the same sample-playback idea and with analog filters too...like a Tempest Rev2 or something
phats
I loved the spec of the pro-2, particularly the cv features and filters, but not the overall sound.

If it had 1-2 prophet voices, choice of curtis or sem filter, all the seq+cv stuff would've been great.
nolongerhuman
I’d love a 4 voice cut down Prophet X, but I think the 8dio aspect of the Prophet X has been such a pain that I don’t know if they will release more hardware with that set up. I hope they do personally, but give the damn thing a physical input.

What I’d love to see is a 2-4 voice 37-49 key full on wavetable synth with both filter options and the distortion/bitcrushing from the Pro 2.
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> General Gear Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next [all]
Page 2 of 3
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group