Feature Request for Prophet 12

The Dave Smith Instruments Prophet-12 Analogue Synthesizer

Moderator: Pym

cbmd
Posts: 346
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 11:49 pm

Re: Feature Request for Prophet 12

Post by cbmd » Mon May 11, 2015 10:18 pm

no DC would only provide an offset but would not limit filter cutoff range modulation. In this case, I would just suggest using your ears when setting modulation amounts so as to not exceed the ranges which you find displeasing.
Carson Day
Technical Support
Dave Smith Instruments

oldgearguy
Posts: 75
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:07 pm

Re: Feature Request for Prophet 12

Post by oldgearguy » Mon May 11, 2015 10:25 pm

Thank you for your suggestions.

One last suggestion from me -

I've been writing software professionally since 1986.
I quickly learned never to take user comments, bug reports, or customer complaints personally.

cbmd
Posts: 346
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 11:49 pm

Re: Feature Request for Prophet 12

Post by cbmd » Mon May 11, 2015 11:41 pm

Thanks for the suggestion, we don't take these things personally most of the time. However, with todays internet forum paradigm in mind, we sometimes feel its necessary to temper user expectations before they get wildly out of control. This is not to say that your suggestion falls into this category.

A good example of this is the Prophet 12's low pass filter range. We increased the overall range of the filter by an octave when compared to the Prophet 08 due to Prophet 08 customers wanting increased range out of the filter. Now we are encountering a few users who would prefer the range to be reduced on the Prophet 12 itself, while others like the increased range...you just can't please everyone all the time.

In the case of the P12 waveform discussion going on over at GS, there has been a lot of conjecture about the cause for "errant" behaviors which have not been quantified by any sort of examples/testing nor evidence of "artifacts".There is a lot of misinformation which can spread like wildfire on forums and it is sometimes in our interest to step in a clear things up.

In general, our instruments have a much larger range of parameter values available when compared to other synthesizer manufacturers. This leads to greater sonic flexibility and palette, though may reduce the "sweet spot" people often refer to when using synths.
Carson Day
Technical Support
Dave Smith Instruments

oldgearguy
Posts: 75
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:07 pm

Re: Feature Request for Prophet 12

Post by oldgearguy » Mon May 11, 2015 11:53 pm

Although, if you followed the waveform discussion over there (I've dropped off GS for a while - too much time spent not getting things done) to the end, you can see that even though the waveforms looked unusual, based on the science sited (Gibbs thing) and the extra filter octave, the conclusion is that the oscillators are likely as good as or better than other digitally generated oscillators in other synths.

The difference is the extra octave up in the filter now allows previously filtered out high harmonics through. These high harmonics are certainly evident in the majority of today's gear (analog or digital). For some of the complex waveforms and modulations, these extra harmonics are welcomed and the P-12 filter definitely does respond well to complex/fast modulations.

The downside is that if one desires to not have these higher harmonics, the choices are limited. One can create a simple static patch with minimal modulation and set the cutoff appropriately, or attempt to continually tweak the modulation amounts in the matrix while playing a full sequence to verify that the combination of notes played and modulations applied still generate the type of tonality desired. An external compressor/limiter can prevent volume extremes, but there is noting internal or external to prevent the frequency extremes.

That is why the suggestion of an upper limit parameter was floated. It gives the user an option. I might want a layered patch with one layer pulsing violently around just the lower end of the filter frequency while the other layer might be a nice smooth glassy pad riding on top of that.

The possibilities open up, not decrease with the addition of a parameter like that.

cbmd
Posts: 346
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 11:49 pm

Re: Feature Request for Prophet 12

Post by cbmd » Tue May 12, 2015 12:10 am

To be clear, there was very little to no science being performed over at GS...there was a lot of wild conjecture paraded as truth. Ive read every page of that thread and was actively reading it all weekend. But I digress...

Since you have been able to determine the issue you dislike as relating to the filter being opened too much, I would again suggest that you dial back on the filter's cutoff and the modulation amounts sent to it. This does not limit your choices, but makes you more aware of how you like the synth to sound and should help inform and direct your workflow when you create programs.
Carson Day
Technical Support
Dave Smith Instruments

User avatar
Mr Kay
Posts: 155
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 7:57 pm
Location: Paris, France
Contact:

Re: Feature Request for Prophet 12

Post by Mr Kay » Tue May 12, 2015 7:24 pm

Personnaly, i'm a bit angry because of the complaints about the triangle, because thet used their oscilloscope instead of their ears :evil:

oldgearguy
Posts: 75
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:07 pm

Re: Feature Request for Prophet 12

Post by oldgearguy » Tue May 12, 2015 9:34 pm

Mr Kay wrote:Personnaly, i'm a bit angry because of the complaints about the triangle, because they used their oscilloscope instead of their ears :evil:
Likely they used their ears first, heard something unusual, then rather than post wild speculations, hooked up measurement tools to verify what they were hearing.

User avatar
Tomavatars
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 11:16 am
Contact:

Re: Feature Request for Prophet 12

Post by Tomavatars » Tue May 12, 2015 11:01 pm

I personally don't care about those wave shapes stuff.

I would be much more exited to know that some new features would be added like some maths in the matrix, some features from the pro 2, more wave shapes why not, phase modulation, curves for ADSR, or the 4th delay line made like the BBD of the pro2 or whatever, but I'm really not sure if Dsi will add anything in the future.

I just want Dsi crew to be clear with users that they'll never work again on the synth except for bugfixes.
I'm not expecting anything anymore, I have the OP1 for this ^^
Still, sometimes, in my dreams...

black953mj
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 4:13 pm

Re: Feature Request for Prophet 12

Post by black953mj » Tue May 12, 2015 11:59 pm

You know, I bought this thing for what it could do when I bought it. It is amazing to me that people get bent out of shape because the features they wish it had don't get added.

I bought it because it sounded good, sounded different to my other stuff, and offered a lot if flexibility in sound design. I enjoy programming it and playing music with it. I knew what I was getting when I bought it and certainly did not expect things to be added after the fact. The expectation that a company continue to add features forever is astounding to me.

Learn your instrument, play music, have fun....but for goodness sake do your homework...if your must have feature isn't there don't buy it.
DSI Prophet 12 - Minimoog Voyager - Access Virus Ti2 - Korg Kronos X - KingKORG - Korg Volca Keys - Korg Volka Bass - Roland RD-700GX - Novation Bass Station Rack - EMU Proteus 2000 - Various other old musical gadgets and dodads

User avatar
Mr Kay
Posts: 155
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 7:57 pm
Location: Paris, France
Contact:

Re: Feature Request for Prophet 12

Post by Mr Kay » Wed May 13, 2015 7:05 am

oldgearguy wrote:Likely they used their ears first, heard something unusual, then rather than post wild speculations, hooked up measurement tools to verify what they were hearing.
For me, it was a bit unusual, an interesting triangle, allowing absolutely fantastic sounds with PWM :P

User avatar
kimsnarf
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 3:47 pm

Re: Feature Request for Prophet 12

Post by kimsnarf » Wed May 13, 2015 7:41 am

Why was the triangle waveform modified? Was it considered a bug? Or did a vocal group suggest making it more "normal"? Can the old triangle be approximated by "morphing" it with one of the other waveforms?

As I understand it the sawtooth waveform is not the issue here but rather the range of the filter affecting it. If so, replacing the waveform won't help. Limiting the range would also limit the flexibility of the synth, which is its main strength.

oldgearguy
Posts: 75
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:07 pm

Re: Feature Request for Prophet 12

Post by oldgearguy » Wed May 13, 2015 11:25 am

black953mj wrote:You know, I bought this thing for what it could do when I bought it. It is amazing to me that people get bent out of shape because the features they wish it had don't get added.

I bought it because it sounded good, sounded different to my other stuff, and offered a lot if flexibility in sound design. I enjoy programming it and playing music with it. I knew what I was getting when I bought it and certainly did not expect things to be added after the fact. The expectation that a company continue to add features forever is astounding to me.

Learn your instrument, play music, have fun....but for goodness sake do your homework...if your must have feature isn't there don't buy it.
Let me preface this reply with -- this will be my last post of this type. If I still own DSI gear in the future, you will only see bug reports with supporting evidence from me.

Also, for those with limited time/attention:
tl;dr summary - manufacturers should wait until the gear is stable, virtually bug free, and feature complete before releasing it


That being said --

I do see a lot of posts similar to the above and I think the premise is wrong. No one spends $3k on something without doing research. Whether the money is sitting in the bank or you had to sell other gear, there was some pre-purchase work done. However, you don't really know until you sit down with the unit in your studio, hooked up to the rest of your equipment, being played the way you play, whether it works for you or not.

In my case, I read through all the topics here, searched through Gearslutz, listened to audio demos, and did some basic searching with Google across the net. I made a list of the identified problems (like Volume always sending CC #7), determined for each one whether or not I could live with it, weighed the other features and capabilities that the P-12 would bring to my setup, and decided to purchase one.

One day after getting it I noticed I could break the delays by pushing their values up to higher amounts. This made me sad - no one had reported it, but yet it's something that should have been caught in the first days of beta testing (actually I'd argue that it should have been found during unit testing of the delay code, but that's another story). So either the DSI beta test team is not very thorough or the bug was deemed too difficult or too minor to fix over the past couple years.

I play with it more, generally liking the modulations and the oscillator possibilities, and then start messing with the filter. This is not the first time I've owned DSI gear (PE and P08), but this time I'm having more trouble than before with the filter/oscillator combination. Time to start testing and comparing. I find some unusual things and so the saga begins.

At this point, I could have returned it and taken a 15% restocking fee loss, but there are redeeming qualities to it, and DSI has decided to follow other manufacturers and implicitly offer free upgrades for life, so naturally the course of action seems to be to push for bugs to be fixed and features to be added.

If the P-12 was a $500 synth, we wouldn't be having any discussion. For $500, the expectation is different and you take what you can get. Ideally, for $3k, you'd open the box and find a full-featured, virtually bug-free machine, but (IMHO) in the rush to get product out there before the competition, the corporate decision is made to ship gear that is half-baked and finish it up later and provide free updates to the early adopters.

This half-finished, free update mentality drives purchasers to expect more features to be added in addition to having promised features finished and bugs fixed, no matter how unreasonable the feature request might be. Why shouldn't I ask for feature XXX? It's something that would make the synth more useful to me in my setup and make it easier and faster to use.

It also skews comparison shopping.

Contrast that to a manufacturer shipping a piece of gear feature-complete with no promise (explicit or implicit) of any new features. As a consumer, I can review the current state of that gear and decide whether it fits in my studio as-is. If I'm comparing finished synth X and half-baked, free updates for life synth Y, I might decide to choose Y even though it doesn't quite fit because in the future, it might be made OK and even do more than X.

User avatar
Bald Eagle
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 8:26 pm
Location: Long Island, NY

Re: Feature Request for Prophet 12

Post by Bald Eagle » Wed May 13, 2015 12:35 pm

When you purchase a synth you should be content with the feature set that it currently has, period. Expect no additional features. However, you should expect that the delivered features work correctly. I think people tend to start blurring the lines between fixing a feature that is not working as expected and adding brand new features.

New features are always welcome but companies need to concentrate more on bug fixes rather then new features and new products. I believe that DSI sees their products as feature complete when released so we can all forget about an endless stream of updates. DSI's problem is bug fixes, they just move on to the next product and maybe work on critical issues when ever.

I'm generally happy with the P12. Yes, there are some issues as there are with pretty much everything I own but that's life. If a piece of gear is not working for you, sell it and move on.

The market place is what it is. I mean a company can 3D print a mockup of a synth and show it at NAMM behind a roaped off area and not even have a working prototype (not that anyone did that). Some companies finish the features, some roll them out over time. It's all fine and well to research the feature set of a synth and listen to sonic demos but that will only complete part of the equation. Buyer beware, we as consumers need to research the company itself before spending thousands of dollars on a piece of musical equipment. Find out how support and updates for previous products are handled. Then make your purchasing decision if you accept the companies policies and have faith in their ability to continue with them.

sapristico
Posts: 56
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:38 pm

Re: Feature Request for Prophet 12

Post by sapristico » Tue May 19, 2015 10:11 am

oldgearguy wrote:
black953mj wrote:You know, I bought this thing for what it could do when I bought it. It is amazing to me that people get bent out of shape because the features they wish it had don't get added.

I bought it because it sounded good, sounded different to my other stuff, and offered a lot if flexibility in sound design. I enjoy programming it and playing music with it. I knew what I was getting when I bought it and certainly did not expect things to be added after the fact. The expectation that a company continue to add features forever is astounding to me.

Learn your instrument, play music, have fun....but for goodness sake do your homework...if your must have feature isn't there don't buy it.
Let me preface this reply with -- this will be my last post of this type. If I still own DSI gear in the future, you will only see bug reports with supporting evidence from me.

Also, for those with limited time/attention:
tl;dr summary - manufacturers should wait until the gear is stable, virtually bug free, and feature complete before releasing it


That being said --

I do see a lot of posts similar to the above and I think the premise is wrong. No one spends $3k on something without doing research. Whether the money is sitting in the bank or you had to sell other gear, there was some pre-purchase work done. However, you don't really know until you sit down with the unit in your studio, hooked up to the rest of your equipment, being played the way you play, whether it works for you or not.

In my case, I read through all the topics here, searched through Gearslutz, listened to audio demos, and did some basic searching with Google across the net. I made a list of the identified problems (like Volume always sending CC #7), determined for each one whether or not I could live with it, weighed the other features and capabilities that the P-12 would bring to my setup, and decided to purchase one.

One day after getting it I noticed I could break the delays by pushing their values up to higher amounts. This made me sad - no one had reported it, but yet it's something that should have been caught in the first days of beta testing (actually I'd argue that it should have been found during unit testing of the delay code, but that's another story). So either the DSI beta test team is not very thorough or the bug was deemed too difficult or too minor to fix over the past couple years.

I play with it more, generally liking the modulations and the oscillator possibilities, and then start messing with the filter. This is not the first time I've owned DSI gear (PE and P08), but this time I'm having more trouble than before with the filter/oscillator combination. Time to start testing and comparing. I find some unusual things and so the saga begins.

At this point, I could have returned it and taken a 15% restocking fee loss, but there are redeeming qualities to it, and DSI has decided to follow other manufacturers and implicitly offer free upgrades for life, so naturally the course of action seems to be to push for bugs to be fixed and features to be added.

If the P-12 was a $500 synth, we wouldn't be having any discussion. For $500, the expectation is different and you take what you can get. Ideally, for $3k, you'd open the box and find a full-featured, virtually bug-free machine, but (IMHO) in the rush to get product out there before the competition, the corporate decision is made to ship gear that is half-baked and finish it up later and provide free updates to the early adopters.

This half-finished, free update mentality drives purchasers to expect more features to be added in addition to having promised features finished and bugs fixed, no matter how unreasonable the feature request might be. Why shouldn't I ask for feature XXX? It's something that would make the synth more useful to me in my setup and make it easier and faster to use.

It also skews comparison shopping.

Contrast that to a manufacturer shipping a piece of gear feature-complete with no promise (explicit or implicit) of any new features. As a consumer, I can review the current state of that gear and decide whether it fits in my studio as-is. If I'm comparing finished synth X and half-baked, free updates for life synth Y, I might decide to choose Y even though it doesn't quite fit because in the future, it might be made OK and even do more than X.

+ 1E+23!! I feel the same way.

This is a logical, respectful but critical, even obvious but necessary even at May 2015 in this forum. At least for everyone who is conscious and has some little knowledge of what and which company/products we are talking about.

The policy of launching products from DSI with the last series is evidently ESPECULATIVE and anticipated due to marketing and market self-pressure, and they have intentionally anticipated a "mother-flagship" concept synth (top of their products) in a previous design state, with evident lacks, sacrifices, and bugs, balance of technology not completed, and so...opening the possibility for P12-Pro2-P6 bussiness in the "top" range...not mentioning the relation with "inferior" or previous series...(P08 with better control...and that "different" sound from P12M? Surprising filter design in Pro2? VCO price vs DCO in cheap ones? any intermediate for the flagship? Incompatible with P12 polyphony but applied in the P6?? Whaaaaaaat? OH...wait...it is the cost issue...yep, I know...eeeehm.....P.S.B.!

There has been an obvious lack of design effort (or real love for the desiring customers and the Prophet name itself) and time for market (to the point required by this kind of product) and after that, and in front of the complaints from people out of the bussiness in a priori judgement (of what is heard, seen and expected in youtube?), they can't affront even the claims from people who have buyed it, depositing some extra confidence, even against the murmur and negative hype on the web..., but waiting for that something else that is clearly possible in the a posteriori approach.

All this apart from the good-free service on support for motherboard faillures (how many of the total sold %?),...I guess lesson learnt from the infinite knobs experience. Lucky people anyway: many years with weak rivalry in this sense.

But now the competence is evidencing even more these lacks!! Come on, even the dear expensive Moog is working in some aspects quite more intensely...(VST integration not included in 3000 cucumbers synths??!!). So, what is that impacting costs ballance?? Quality in manufacture? Design and develope times? Expensive components like Curtis VCF? VST and O.S. develope and avant garde functionallity??
All the improvements and updates from Elektron, the Virus reviews of software and functions, modulars growing offer, analog revivals from the majors (Roland, Korg...), very adjusted and well developed new analogs (Xenophone), other new proposals on the horizon, vintage reviews or modern approaches to "that sound"...Winter is coming.

User avatar
Mr Kay
Posts: 155
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 7:57 pm
Location: Paris, France
Contact:

Re: Feature Request for Prophet 12

Post by Mr Kay » Wed May 20, 2015 10:38 pm

sapristico wrote:The policy of launching products from DSI with the last series is evidently ESPECULATIVE and anticipated due to marketing and market self-pressure
Actually, the Evolver series was coming to the end of its commercial life, the PEK rack and the MEK were already discontinued when the P'12 was announced. And personnally, the Prophet 12 is what I expected, an improved PEK, with 12 voices, more flexibility and a better workflow, of course I could expect to meet troubles as one of the first buyers, it was a calculated risk.

lt773
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2014 9:36 pm

Re: Feature Request for Prophet 12

Post by lt773 » Thu May 28, 2015 4:41 pm

I feel like this has probably been mentioned, but having individual oscillator slop mod destinations would be awesome.

zerocrossing
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 10:57 pm
Location: San Francisco
Contact:

Re: Feature Request for Prophet 12

Post by zerocrossing » Sat May 30, 2015 4:03 am

cbmd wrote:Thanks for the suggestion, we don't take these things personally most of the time. However, with todays internet forum paradigm in mind, we sometimes feel its necessary to temper user expectations before they get wildly out of control. This is not to say that your suggestion falls into this category.

A good example of this is the Prophet 12's low pass filter range. We increased the overall range of the filter by an octave when compared to the Prophet 08 due to Prophet 08 customers wanting increased range out of the filter. Now we are encountering a few users who would prefer the range to be reduced on the Prophet 12 itself, while others like the increased range...you just can't please everyone all the time.

In the case of the P12 waveform discussion going on over at GS, there has been a lot of conjecture about the cause for "errant" behaviors which have not been quantified by any sort of examples/testing nor evidence of "artifacts".There is a lot of misinformation which can spread like wildfire on forums and it is sometimes in our interest to step in a clear things up.

In general, our instruments have a much larger range of parameter values available when compared to other synthesizer manufacturers. This leads to greater sonic flexibility and palette, though may reduce the "sweet spot" people often refer to when using synths.
Uh, dat'dbe me. :|

But, I did post audio of the waveforms and a spectral analysis. Many people more knowledgable than I acknowledged that it did indeed look and sounds a bit strange. I'm no goldenears, but I've been around the block and I've been using analog and digital synths since 82. I've played everything from Poly 800s to Synclaviers. I've spent a lot of years working in music stores as well so I've seen many things come and go over the years. I've actually heard what I was talking about in demos before I purchased one, but I just assumed it was some wavetable or one of the character functions causing the harshness. I know you don't think it exists, but saying that a fairly large group of seasoned synth users' opinion is "spreading misinformation" is... well it's misinformation.

Anyway, I'm happy with my Prophet 12. I actually really love it. I began a project taking my favorite MoPho sounds and reproducing them on the 12, and I actually feel like I'm improving the patches. I've also recommended it many places including GS, despite it's shortcomings. I've already just naturally started avoiding what I'm talking about, no real need for filter limits. It's like a sensitive tooth, you just learn to make sure the ice cream doesn't hit it. It's easy enough, but the condescending attitude that Oldgearguy and I are somehow starting some propaganda campaign, based on nothing, against the 12 is incorrect.

Oh, and btw, I just heard Marc Doty's Prophet 6 osc demo and they sound fanfentastic to me. So, I'm not out on some DSI witch hunt or something.
You can't make every one happy, but you can make everyone miserable!

oldgearguy
Posts: 75
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:07 pm

Re: Feature Request for Prophet 12

Post by oldgearguy » Sat May 30, 2015 9:00 am

Respectfully request that delay amount ALL and delay feedback ALL be added as modulation destinations.

(Saves on modulation slots)

Thanks

zerocrossing
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 10:57 pm
Location: San Francisco
Contact:

Re: Feature Request for Prophet 12

Post by zerocrossing » Sat May 30, 2015 4:17 pm

How about a way to disable note triggering on the arp and use it as a modulation source instead? (or both)
You can't make every one happy, but you can make everyone miserable!

User avatar
Tenskwatawa
Posts: 77
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 9:45 am
Location: PacNW
Contact:

Re: Feature Request for Prophet 12

Post by Tenskwatawa » Sat May 30, 2015 7:28 pm

zerocrossing wrote:How about a way to disable note triggering on the arp and use it as a modulation source instead? (or both)
that's a great idea. +1

Post Reply