Triangle wave looks more like a square wave

The Dave Smith Instruments Prophet-12 Analogue Synthesizer

Moderator: Pym

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

Re: Triangle wave looks more like a square wave

Post by sapristico » Mon Sep 07, 2015 12:42 pm

BobTheDog wrote:
sapristico wrote:"quickest way to market..." have identified (or finally recognize) the superlative (est) problem (also in some other senses and aspects with this product) it's time to provide the that REAL market...that is: to the BEST way.

Don't take it personal....bussiness is bussiness...and synth love is synth love.
Do you need some kind of sketch to understand my point? BEST vs QUICKEST? Oh...yeah....maybe, If you are really meaning "WTF?"...that is exactly what I felt reading the "quickest way to market" philosofy and the hype these days in terms of "Everything is really good now with 1.2.26!" "P12 is perfect now"...End of the film...)

Obviously not only for the SHARC choice and waveforms enigmas-limitations in a Digitally DSP generated synth (justified?)...which is part of the focus in this thread debate...but because it's obviously behind some of the grey zones, lacks or misleads in this synth, and the improvements possibilities that the product (customers) deserves NOW (in the senses that it can be done...not esssential or depth, but at least in O.S. level)...given that it was put into the market with that kind of philosofy.

If you want...I can expand the explanation and ideas behind...but we know that probably nobody wants.

User avatar
Posts: 1156
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 8:49 pm

Re: Triangle wave looks more like a square wave

Post by BobTheDog » Mon Sep 07, 2015 1:15 pm

I meant, "what" as in "What the hell are you talking about".

I still don't understand what you are talking about, are you saying that SHARC DSPs are no good?

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

Re: Triangle wave looks more like a square wave

Post by sapristico » Thu Sep 10, 2015 11:36 am

Good for me!! I only mismatched the H instead the F...Nevertheless I have to apologize because not being a native English speaker, it's probably my fault not explaining correctly some of my points of view (own), or not expressing ideas in the better way...Maybe you have also some problems regarding explanations and even explicit Capitals meaning. Take it only as a rethorical daring game.

I tried to clarify that SHARC not to be the main problem at all (just hearing what arises from a Solaris is evident that "a bit" of knowledge and work can obtain a Huge and Varied "everything but digital" pure fat Sound from them...even more from digital "not so expensive" polymorphic filters!)...but a typical reasonable choice for a synth like this [the number of chips, and power-programming squeeze can be another word].

Nevertheless, coming from Flux 302 questioning or doubts regarding specifically the design around that chip-wavetables-sound process consequences, the answer was clear: No clear response....and then the "quickest" DSI philosophy to put P12 into the market. That served me to dare playing the Alonso Quijano me crazy.

That is what I pointed as Superlative (EST) problem in the approach for designing-manufacturing-budgeting-selling the synth in that QUICKEST way (if not an intentional speculative hidden choice for not flexible SEM 2nd filter, SEQ, Wforms in Pro2, FX...? plus the obvious design limitations (parts hardwired outputs, unison (this is O.S!), distorsion, feedback...).
From this, I ethically (maybe wrongly) infer the necessary after-market work in different and (let me tell you) even OBVIOUS senses and fields.
In others it is a jewell and art piece for the control concept and new quality and replacement policy of DSI
Some of these lacks have been brought to us with the 1.2.26, yes. Imagine what it could offer in a REAL FLAGSHIP 2.0 version.

Maybe it can be time wasting...but let me make some extra "clarifications" for your absentmindedness or my faults explaining what the fuck I am talking about and why...if necessary (I don't think so,...but Internet is this kind of shit):

1) I expressed before my position and thanksfulness with the NEW DSI policy, efforts, communication here, and attitude to give that extra (not extra in fact) functionallity/stability/solidity to this, and/or other (everything but economic) products...against the Commercial Rythm of this industry for a litle company, after the new issue of ambitious products, commercial strategy changing, new revealing hirings, etc.

OK, the message is simple: THIS is the way. Not the one before. But it is only that...the WAY, not the END, not the definitive GOAL. And I think that everybody is aware of this (even DSI guys and their desires about productive time, means...), mainly regarding P12 (and Tempest)...maybe for some bugs in Pro2 and P6 too, for sure. But...who really trust this gonna be the total engagement scenario?

2) The development and personal compromise of some employees of DSI here in the Forum with the O.S. version and reviews (so, from the company if it's an organized strategy), and our collaboration as beta testers, is for sure good for all, and other point to give thanks...

It is in some way heartwarming and it shows a positive way to mutual understanding and collaboration, support, and strategy, if they learn to take advantage of all of this.
As a member of the forum (and human) I keen on appraising the personal role of these guys, and appreciate their personal commitment or comunication (even limited) with us...but, as a customer (not so wealthy, and tough ($) purchaser) I must move my interests and requests as they must be in the context that we are, that in fact should be the ones in the marketing area of DSI (according to the usual discourse regarding the Companies and Bussiness POV from many people)....

If bussiness is bussiness, and we are talking about this kind of product-market-price…then my role must be the demanding client, because the Flagship is not that at all. Only the Euro-Dollar crazyness in the last year has provided some new excuses in terms of price labelling for different products,...that are not supported by the design-features-suposed costs-results in each product.

3) ...and yes, I have to express my BUT(t)...because I don't understand the kind of declaim time (as the woman in the sauna from Kundera's Immortality) "it's really good now" or "enough for me", “1.2.26 is perfect” here these days. Stockholm syndrome after one year and a half of an uncomplete high-end product, waiting for some attention or love from the very work-bussy daddy?

Maybe I have lost something, but giving thanks to Chris, or cbmd, or enjoying the FM linear as well as other features (that under my POV and even the common sense in designing a synth like this in the BEST way, not the QUICKEST to market, should be there from the beginning, with an in depth strategy for market with the so called: "Flagship High Design New Prophet of Prophets Poly Synth of the Decade and a half") is not the opposite of keeping in contributing to construct the path, following new steps, and pointing what “must” be done...expecting that path to reach different areas, regions, towns, houses...that are necessary to be reached, and for sure, that are not ENDLESS. Only a map is necessary.
I don't want to sound pert, or harsh, or ungrateful and whimsical...simply I want The BEST that the P12 technically could-can afford for the Price of being launched in the “QUICKEST WAY TO MARKET”, must be.
I know I know...the usual platitude for the point here..."You must buy a synth according with the things that it does when it is launched"...but I can't agree when the real competition and market are demonstrating exactly the opposite even with quite cheaper instruments (that, by the way, include the soft editor or VST...2015 (and 2012-13-14) reality!), and in our case, the developers of the machine suddenly discovers some critical new features and components to be added in the "one year after product", and again one more year after into a semiflagship real analog polysynth...

I don't believe a lot in fortuity in this context, although maybe it's the case, and they thought in SEM just out of time (please, forget the excuse about polyphonic second filter and costs! It's obvious the extra sound possibilities with the SEM flexible structure even in paraphonic mode after or paralell with the poly LPF....)
But at least I prefer to compensate it with Responsibility. If Reallity is like it is and nothing else remains to be said, the P12 guinea pigs customers will be deserving at least that extra effort in terms of OS functionallities (and even in synth sound quality-flexibility-character), for some extra time (and features VS "costs" policies between products…that is the problem here, just say it)...further than bug cleaning. We are supporting in a notable amount the new products' strategy and financing, for the last 3 years, aren't we?

Given all this, and the COMPETITIVENESS context for hi level synths market we are involved (2015, even without the real boutique ones)...the total continuous SUPPORT for products of this range, and squeezing of as much features (at least or last in O.S. level capabilities) as possible, is a MUST nowadays.
Otherwise, I don't get quite clear how many P12 (meeeh flagship) they hope to keep selling in Europe pointing 3300 euros!! with the P6 at 3099...yeah...wait...oh...(Homer style revelation), or that desired P12V (with all that stuff that changes the meeeh into the real WOW Flagship?) at 3700-4000? Come on...I abandon that ship now. I understand the point for some of you that shows 6-8 synths from DSI, surpassing the 12000 investment and fansupport...but NOT MY CASE. I'm not allowed by myself to reach that degree of bourgeois fad.

If someone wants to talk, or work on about the MAP, the PATH, and the NOT ENDLESS at all strategy to put that specific areas/powers/functionallities potentially available of P12 in that deserved exhaustive reallity, flexibility, and "quality" (sound and more) that it and we deserve...we can try...but, anyone in DSI or here wants really any of that? I only hope that the problem is not fear of embarrassment, assumptions, or the quickest way to benefits and lack of responsibility bussiness philosophy.

Yeah, yeah...this said, I also love the P12...but, you know, sometimes it is necessary your love to put extra meat on the grill, some candles, an special dinner, sexy clothes (no sexist-hetero-homo-trans limitation) and that kind of new passion...or that love could get boring and rusty. We have put enough meat on the, babe, its your turn.

Sincerely without bitterness...kissex 4all

Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 5:02 pm

Re: Triangle wave looks more like a square wave

Post by minimaltom » Sat Nov 21, 2015 12:54 am


Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2015 7:40 am

Re: Triangle wave looks more like a square wave

Post by michaeljhuman » Fri Feb 19, 2016 6:02 am

How come the sawtooth wave is asymmetrical across the 0 axis? Probably sounds the same, but I find it odd that it's not symmetrical

Post Reply