SOUND ON SOUND

[DGL.]

Would appear DSI/SCI are redoing the Prophet 5/10 (they're calling it a REV. 4), supposedly as his 70th birthday present to all of us.

https://www.sequential.com/product/prophet-5/
https://www.sequential.com/product/prophet-10/
Images from the SCI/DSI Website,







Too bad the 10 doesn't have the dual keyboard of the most common version of the original (too much heat generated putting the 10 into the 5 case was why it was changed if what I've read is correct, so they decided to put a extra keyboard in the bigger case that was needed, hence the extra keyboard).
Also a bit surprised that they didn't decided to up the voice count a bit but there will be "purists" that will make the argument that a prophet 5 will only be a prophet 5 if it has 5 voices :headbang:

Andertons are saying £3,299 and £3,999 respectively.

I can see the price of the Prophet 6 being affected bit if we all brought synths on the future worth we wouldn't buy any!

I also wonder if part of this release it to get in there before Behringer?, saturate your market before competitors catch up

[Eddy Deegan]

Oooooh... that would look nice next to the Prophet-6 :tongue:

I can see myself looking into that later but shall bide my time though... got a few other things happening in the meantime studio-wise and I the Prophet 6 / OB-6 are more than enough for my current requirements on that sort of synth.

[resistorman]

I can think of so many better ways to spend thousands of dollars.

[Arpangel]

This looks good, but that 5 octave keyboard is a bit out of place on a synth of today, isn’t it?

:D

[Dave B]

Saw this and thought "That's nice". But I have a Prophet 6 and that covers my Prophet-y sounds just fine. I'm sure that there will be people very excited and I'm sure it's great, but I think I will smile and move on this time.

Blimey! That's incredibly grown up of me! I don't know what the world is coming to....

[Martin Walker]

I'm intrigued by the discussion by DSI employees of the new Prophet 5 and 10 'analogue randomess' control, created by carefully analysing the value spread of various parameters across the rev 1, 2, and 3 versions, and now this Rev 4 version. I'd be interested to find out which parameters are getting varied, and by how much 8-)

EDIT: tracked down the quote from a DSI employee:

"We analyzed a bunch of different Prophet REV2s and REV3s and found that they all had a unique sound. We identified several key parameters which affect this and mapped them to the Vintage knob in varying amounts to simulate the older instruments. Again, it's not a randomized slop parameter like that on the Prophet 6 and OB-6. It's quite musical across its entire range and really gives the experience of using a vintage Prophet 5."


Dave Smith also said "The new Prophet-5 features original, genuine Curtis VCOs and filters as used in the Prophet-5 Rev3, as well as the Dave Rossum-designed SSI 2140 filter, the modern counterpart of the original SSM 2040 Rossum designed in the Prophet-5 Rev1 and Rev2. “We made the new Prophet-5 the best of all Prophets by embodying all three revisions of the original. We did this by adding a Rev switch to the front panel, so you can choose your preferred filter."



Martin

[Dave B]

This control is going to cause all manner of arguments amongst the synth purists as to where the 'right' value for specific revision actually is. I can imagine it now - "a proper rev2 is somewhere around the 1.9 mark!" "Idiot! It's more like the 2.221 mark" etc

Don't you just the internet :D

[Ben Asaro]

It's times like this when I'm glad I live in a postage-stamp sized NYC apartment. That thing is definitely calling my name!

[shiihs]

I'm intrigued by the discussion by DSI employees of the new Prophet 5 and 10 'analogue randomess' control, created by carefully analysing the value spread of various parameters across the rev 1, 2, and 3 versions, and now this Rev 4 version. I'd be interested to find out which parameters are getting varied, and by how much 8-)

EDIT: tracked down the quote from a DSI employee:

"We analyzed a bunch of different Prophet REV2s and REV3s and found that they all had a unique sound. We identified several key parameters which affect this and mapped them to the Vintage knob in varying amounts to simulate the older instruments. Again, it's not a randomized slop parameter like that on the Prophet 6 and OB-6. It's quite musical across its entire range and really gives the experience of using a vintage Prophet 5."

Martin

My guess is they were inspired by the (outstanding) work of sequential forum user "CreativeSpiral" with his "Voice Component Modeling" technique (see http://www.voicecomponentmodeling.com/vcm.aspx for an explanation of what he came up with).

[desmond]

It doesn't seem so long ago that people were saying "they'd never make analog polysynths like they did back in the day because it's too expensive, no market, no tooling for analog gear, obsolete components etc etc"...

Shows that all of those folks' opinions were unfounded!

It's interesting because, by todays standards, synths like these are limited, and they aren't "vintage" so don't quite satisfy the person who wants the originals. And yet - they still seem to sell out without too many problems..!

I wonder how long it will take for them to become uncool the second time around... :lol:

[Arpangel]

The Pro 5 was a genuinely unique synth, so many synths in the hands of so many, sound so boring. I often think "what? people are raving about this but it sounds like an 80’s pop record, is that all you, and that synth can do?" I'll pass thanks.
But deep down I know there is good stuff lurking, the Pro 5 is a perfect example, and most of the music it’s famous for sounds awful to me and could have been done on anything.
I hired a Pro 5 around 89/90, for a day, the sounds I got from it I could not get from anything else, the way the modulation worked was amazing, the routing, IMO I made some of my best music on that day.
It was a classic case of the equipment really inspiring me to do stuff, I can remember, we had a Bel BD80s delay, and we fed the 5 into it on loop mode, just building up layers, my friend was standing by with his Roland GR-500 and things just took off.
Synths like this are like violins, completely timeless.

[Martin Walker]

I'm intrigued by the discussion by DSI employees of the new Prophet 5 and 10 'analogue randomess' control, created by carefully analysing the value spread of various parameters across the rev 1, 2, and 3 versions, and now this Rev 4 version. I'd be interested to find out which parameters are getting varied, and by how much 8-)

My guess is they were inspired by the (outstanding) work of sequential forum user "CreativeSpiral" with his "Voice Component Modeling" technique (see http://www.voicecomponentmodeling.com/vcm.aspx for an explanation of what he came up with).

Yes, that is indeed a most outstanding body of work that I've read before - well done for remembering it shiihs! :clap:

As it happens, today I came across a quote from Dave Smith himself that sheds a little more light on the Vintage control:

Smith continued, “We also researched what made the original P-5 sound the way it did — organic and alive — and found that a lot of that desirable character was due to fluctuations and differences in the response times and frequencies of the individual oscillators, filters, and envelopes from voice to voice. So we also added a Vintage knob that loosens all of them up like they were in the old days. You can dial in progressively more vintage character as you go from a very stable “4,” as in Prophet-5 Rev4, all the way to “1,” as in Prophet-5 Rev1, which was the most temperamental of all Prophet-5s. We’ve even included the original factory sound set for the full vintage experience.”


Martin

[Martin Walker]

Just stumbled across this most excellent demo from synthesist Julian Pollack (aka J3PO), that highlights lots of the new sounds he created on the pre-production prototype of the new Prophet-5.

Well worth a listen!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Or8L8vB ... e=emb_logo


Martin

[The Elf]

I can't figure out how I feel about this one. I never liked (and still don't) the P5, but I love the P1. I have a friend who plays his P5 as a monosynth and it sounds fabulous. As a poly I think it has all the charm of a braying donkey.

Hmmm...

[desmond]

I can't figure out how I feel about this one. I never liked (and still don't) the P5, but I love the P1.

As is often the case, I feel the same as The Elf.

Was never particularly fond of the P5, but the Pro-1 is probably my fave (of the classics) monosynth. Strange, as they are obviously so similar is so many ways.

I have a friend who plays his P5 as a monosynth and it sounds fabulous. As a poly I think it has all the charm of a braying donkey.

While the P5 was certainly an important instrument and a game changer back when that term actually meant something, I find it fairly cold and harsh a lot of the time - maybe "hard" is the better term. I have u-he's Repro and I feel the same way - the P5 when you open up the filter has a character I'm not so fond of - it's much better for me when you close the filter down and warm things up.

I guess I'm just not really a fan of the American polys so much. I always preferred Rolands over the Moogs, SCI's and Oberheims etc, for polysynths.