Originally Posted by JEBEQ
Obviously this is just a raw recording and it will take a bit of processing and effects to make it sound just like Cowley's. On my mix I had to add EQ compression Chorus, Delay and Reverb to coax it to sound as close as possible to Cowleys.
A couple things from your sound demo though, it seems that the filter envelope is set a bit different on the Rev 3, it just cuts off and does not have the smoother decay that is set on the REV2. When the rev3 comes in at 25sec it does sound just a bit brighter but it might be the ENV amount. All in all, I am not finding the two P5's to have as huge of a difference as I was expecting it to, and I think that most of the P5 sound you here in Cowleys was due to EQing, effects and processing.
You're right, I did notice a minor difference in ENV, and I'm not sure it's my fault, I think the rev2 probably needs to be calibrated in that regard, but I did try to tweak out the minor differences, once I get the cassette interface, we'll know for sure as I'll be able to convert patches between the two (and my rev 2 will be freshly serviced and calibrated!) BTW. that's the rev2 at 25 seconds, not the rev3! The rev2 indeed sounds brighter. While the difference isn't huge in my cowley example, I think other examples show much greater differences. Especially in resonance. I feel like in the cowley example, the rev2 sounds less hazey, more open, more metallic even...In fact that brass sound was one thing I had much trouble making sound the same on both revisions! The rev3 would sound like someone threw a blanket over the speakers or something.
Originally Posted by rodion
thanks for the comparison!
it really seems to me that you have to get your rev3's output fixed my friend,
way too much crackling
but beside that there's quite a difference in the sound of the two prophet revs.
I wouldn't love to admit it, since I own a rev3
but the sound of your rev2 it's quite a lot fuller and beefier than the one of rev3.
again there's definitely something wrong in the output of your rev3,
it seems like some frequencies are missing out of the spectrum
but you can definitely hear the difference between the two, especially when it comes to filter tweaking.
rev2 sounds much more like 5 70ies monosynths playing togheter.
yes, the cracking is all just from the keybed, dirty j-wires or what not. it will sound fine if I play it over midi. It needs a cleaning BAD.
the first patch especially though, that brass just sounds insane on the rev2. very 70s like you said. I didn't want to admit it myself until I heard them side by side. To be brutally honest, the recording doesn't do it total justice, when playing them next to each other they seem to sound a lot more different, the range on the rev2's sound palette is just wider, IMO.
it's funny you say frequencies sound missing on the rev3, I do feel like the rev2's filter is able to apply it's character (as in, gently applying filter), but let more sound through, at the same time. It's like, the rev3 filter can't sound quite as open, nor can it "clamp down" as much when you want to. It seems to effect frequencies on a way different curve or something. I don't think anything's actually wrong with the rev3 in that regard, though. I think it's just the differences in the filter.
Originally Posted by Radiance
I once did a test between the two revisions...that is, I got a audio file from a rev 2 and I tried making the same sounds on my rev 3.
I even got patch sheets from the sounds made on the rev 2.
Using the same settings as the rev 2, I could hear quite some difference when reproduced on my rev 3.
However, when just trying to recreate the sound I think I could get it 95% right most of the time.
Only when doing filter sweeps there was a clear difference.
However, just adding a little EQ to the rev 3 made the sound indistinguishable from the rev 2.
And this is something most synth purist don't want to hear....most sounds we like from these old synth records are processed sounds.
The synth will provide the basic sound but that's just 70% of the whole sound IMHO. The other 30% is mic pre, EQ, fx and compression and what not...
Okay, so I said I'd save my opinions for later, but basically what I found is that I had more ease making the rev2 sound like the rev3, than vice versa. There was occasionally sounds that I just flat out couldn't make match either way, but most of the time, the rev2 could match the rev3 before I could get the rev3 to match rev2, MOST. As I was saying before, to me, it seemed as if there's just more range in the filter or something. Something is especially different about how the resonance effects the sound. I'm sure with enough EQ and effects you can drown out the differences enough so that it's less noticable, but not for everything. I agree though that most of these famous sounds from records and what not are a combination of the synth and the vintage recording and processing equipment from the time, but I'm now entirely convinced it's not JUST that.
Originally Posted by maisonvague
Me, too -- though not always, of course. Filter sweeps and patches making extreme use of resonance are where the differences between rev2 and rev3 Prophets really come through for me. There is a harshness to the rev3 filter that occasionally crosses the threshold of pain for me. Rev2s can squeal, too, of course, but still... .
Please make some more demos, Xero! As a big fan of Prophets, I enjoy these kinds of threads immensely! Cheers.
oh they can both squeal on resonance alright! the rev2's resonance is ridiculously nice though. I was trying to hold my opinions back so badly in the first post! I will definitely be posting more demos. I've currently got a kenton midi kit on order, so I've got until that gets here to play with it and make more demos. Once it arrives though, it's off to get serviced and upgraded! Then once I get it back, the real demo will begin! I'll be able to copy patches via cassette and play identically on both.
Originally Posted by golden beers
you're not really going to gain much insight comparing like for like presets for the reasons Radiance says, depends how the synths are calibrated for one.
another big factor in the rev2 love is it's gritty organic-ness, basically in scientific terms, the synth's a little fuked-up.! low quality trim-pots mean you can't calibrate each voice to be exactly the same, which is a good thing. i've thought about replacing the trim-pots in mine (eg voice output level) but decided against it. the whole looseness of 'tuning' (not just in pitch terms) really adds something. anyway.. i'll try and get back today with a simple patch.. maybe tomorrow. all depends on what torchure the wife has planned for me
Luckily the rev2 is getting serviced/upgraded shortly. The rev3 I'll be holding on to in the mean time, but eventually I do need to get it's keybed cleaned, badly....the rev2's organicness is definitely pretty awesome, although it's not as "horribly off" as some people would like to make you think, I think the filter differences are by far the biggest, but the rest of the SSM chipset, I'm sure, has something to do with it as well.