I have to admit when I finally decided to get Rev2 as my primary poly (in addition to the pure analog monster Martriarch) I was underwhelmed by how dead Rev2 sounded in comparison.. but this is actually making Rev2 usable, more over it turns it into an absolutly amazing synth worth every penny, free templates are enough to understand the concept and to build any sound one might want. I still decided to buy both packs though to appreciate your idea, thank you!
This is - by far - the most magic synth tweak I discovered in 2021. Literally incredible and so kind of you to reveal this to the world. Many many thanks ❤
just tried this on my rev2, I don't have the software so I did it manually, and it's not as hard as I thought it would be! this is such a useful trick and even if you choose to use 4 lanes in the mod matrix, there's still lots of modulation lanes left to use (including some dedicated slots for mod wheel, pressure, velocity, etc that I always forget about). once I got it set up fully with the envelope temporal offsets and everything, it totally changed the character of the synth. it's insane how powerful the Rev2 can be when you know how to use it. definitely going to use it as an initial template for all my patches now.
This is absolutely amazing! Thank you so much for your research and knowledge sharing of this. I just bought a Rev2 (just before watching your video) and someone on a forum had glowing things to say about your VCM process so I wanted to check it out. That Blade Runner patch you made is sooooo lush and beautiful. Very creative and I hope Dave Smith saw this to see how versatile his Rev2 has become. Although, if everyone saw this there would probably be less P5, P6, and P10 sales haha
Just now coming across this video when looking for some info on my Rev2 but after recently acquiring and subsequently restoring and calibrating a Jupiter 4 this makes so much sense. Especially when you go into the resonances and how the calibration on the Jupiter was almost a spot on representation doing each voice card. I think a light bulb clicked on after seeing this and what you are doing. Going to have to go and try some of this soon. Great explanation and information!
Absolutely great stuff! And amazing that you figured this out yourself, where the manufactures could've discovered this and made better instruments... Bravo!
Nice! Hope some of the manufacturers take notice of your work. Bought your patches a couple of weeks ago. It has really REVived my Rev2 and made it fun to play and explore again. Thanks!
this is what does the vintage knob on the new prophet 5. Lower values of vintage enhance the detune between the oscillators for pitch, envelope, filter, etc...
I was sad that the Rev2 didn't get the vintage mode update like the P6, but somehow this technique seems to breathe the same life into it! Rev2 is going on my wishlist.
Immediately subscribed after watching this. I've been holding of on purchasing the Rev2 just bc of my quandary about vintage sound capabilities. This video was most helpful. Thanks for that link also.
Just bought the 15 Ep patch set, thank you so much and what a deal at 10 bucks. You really saved me, I was struggeling to get a decent Ep sound, gave up and was thinking I needed to get another board like a MODX for basic pianos. Love the sounds love them love them love them, thank you thank you thank you. Rich
I just received my Rev2, stoked. I'm a bit confused, at 4:36 , in the gated sequencer in layer A, Destination 1 and Destination 2 are set to OFF, but you say they are targeting Osc Freq 1 and 2?
The mapping to Osc Freq 1 and Osc Freq 2 is done in the mod matrix instead. If you route directly via the gated sequencer, the values are too coarse... but using the mod matrix, you can scale down the values to tiny fractions, which are appropriate to get the vintage voice modeling behavior. If you look at the example patches I uploaded, you'll see the mod matrix setup. Also, in the Blade Runner sound design video I did, I go through the entire setup and discuss in more detail how the connections are made: ruclips.net/video/jB9HG3k3vvQ/видео.html (starting around 5:50)
I can't believe how ignorant I was of this synth: for years we've all been going "Don't get the P8 because it's a 'thin filter'" - and although the filter is certainly a big aspect, I had zero idea there was a way to offset the sound this way on the Rev2. Literally the only thing that kept me from buying one as my main poly is the flatness of it. Thank you *very* much for the work you put in, Jason! What would you say is the technical difference between your method and the Slop function they added on the Rev2? Also, I wonder how you subjectively view the Rev2 next to the other Prophets after you've done the voice variance technique. I'm not asking for a video (although that would certainly be interesting!), but your thoughts would be appreciated. Anyway, thanks very much, and see you on the Pro3 Facebook page!
Thanks Danny - glad you've found it useful! My feeling is that per-voice variance has been the most underestimated/misunderstood characteristic of vintage poly character. People generally can only describe their preferences in very subjective terms why they prefer vintage synths. (this is what set me on my exploration in the first place... I wanted to understand objectively what is different) I have written many articles on the topic here, if you want to read more of my thoughts: ( www.presetpatch.com/articles/voice-component-modeling ) Capturing the per-voice variances with offsets to a variety of components delivers so much of the vintage poly vibe. There are, of course, many other sound differences based on VCF filter type, envelope implementation and other particulars of the electrical design. So there will always be sonic differences between synths, but my feeling is that I'm very happy with my Rev2 now, and wouldn't trade it for either a P5, P6 or OB6, even though those are more premium priced instruments. (I like to have the flagship capabilities of the Rev2 with its vastly extended modulation architecture)... I will say I do slightly prefer the SSM 4-Pole and SEM 2-Pole filters on Seqs other instruments though (I really love the Pro3 filter offerings) SLOP (and OSC DRIFT) are what I would call "mediocre approximations" for capturing per voice variance to tuning. They are random, and constantly in motion (an artificial type of motion, if compared with measurements of actual vintage synths after they have warmed up) Slop and Drift work okay for sounds with very quick ADR stages, but for any sound design with extended periods (pads, strings, brass), they introduce a bunch of extra artificial type of motion. In addition, Slop and Drift (and random LFO methods) at higher values will sometimes lead to weird moments of extreme dissonance, which can be avoided with Voice Modeling with curated offsets. And finally, Slop/Drift/Random LFOs don't give you repeatable performance characteristics from session to session. (ie: you might have a recording session where everything randomly aligns to sound beautiful, but then take that same patch on the road, and the randomness gives you a different sounding beast) And of course, SLOP just targets Osc Freq... the Voice Modeling paradigm includes Envelope ADR temporal variances, and other offsets to components as well.
@@CreativeSpiral Very comprehensive, thank you. Even given that it's all subjective, it's much easier to be steered when you know you're listening to someone who's very invested in the issue. This really swings me in favour of just pulling the trigger on the Rev (unless KORG releases a Prologu with a sequencer and some more modulation, which would be incredible). I actually agree fully about the Slop function: I understand its mathematics less and less. As an example, I have a Pro 3 patch where one LFO modulates the actual pitch of all three oscillators with Intensity set to just 1 and the Rate set at about 70 (a violin/cello vibration, basically), and you know what - it sounds *way* more natural than Oscillator Slop, which goes from barely noticeable to suddenly very unnatural. So we're in complete agreement there. I've discovered that ultra-light pitch modulations at 1-2 intensity sound much more Boards of Canada, if you will, than any oscillator slop I've ever tried. Thanks again for the thoughts and the link to the full version, I'll make sure to have a read tonight!
Interesting concept. This kind of thing is something I have been doing for many years on VCO based synths - as a technique to push them more towards the behaviour of acoustic instruments. In particular my Alesis Andromeda has a per voice random modulation source which can be useful for this sort of thing. I think the Deepmind also has parameter randomisation on a per voice basis built in as a dedicated control. Some vintage analogue synths such as the minimoog are so variable in this respect you don't need to program it deliberately, it just happens anyway! Sample and hold triggered by note on can also generate a new value for every note, which is even more lively than per voice variance. However there is still something about DCO based synths that is different to my ears. the oscillator sound is thinner and less substantial, transients are more precise and they behave differently in a mix. The more instances you use in a mix the more pronounced the differences between DCO and VCO become. Anyway interesting ideas thanks.
Hey David - Yeah, I have done a ton of research on the topic of voice variance in vintage and modern synths... the Deepmind's Osc Drift and Parameter Drift algorithms are both based on random drifting motion. The downside of these (as well as Seq's Osc Slop), is that its introducing an extra layer of artificial motion into the equation. Based on the research I've done, the key is to create curated, stable per voice offsets. With the Slop/Drift/Parameter Drift methods, you get artificial drifting motion added in which is unrealistic, you'll get moments of odd dissonance at med/higher values due to random nature and phasing, and these methods don't produce repeatable performance as voices are cycles, or from session to session. I've also experimented extensively with other methods like LFO random (S+H) and other tricks... they all have the downsides associated with randomness. All of this is discussed in more detail on the VCM website: www.VoiceComponentModeling.com That's interesting that Andromeda has a voice mod source... I didn't know that. Always wanted an Andromeda :) Voice as a source is definitely a good way to implement VCM type of techniques though... that's what I use on Deepmind, and now on PolyBrute.
@@CreativeSpiral its an interesting topic and I agree that random based pitch and other parameter slop is not entirely natural, you have to be subtle with it but I think it helps to liven things up. My own interest is based on the behaviour of acoustic instruments as applied to analogue synths. So its interesting that you mention trying to make a performance 'repeatable' in terms of the voice offsets. Acoustic instrument performance is never repeatable at the kind of micro level we are talking about. Actually I like that. I think a lot of synth makers have thought about this issue - for example my Sub37 has an osc drift parameter, which I think is actually a per note random offset to pitch. My Macbeth M5n has an oscillator 'stability' control which seems to introduce some variability into the oscillator tracking across the keyboard. Thanks for the link I will look through your website with interest. Always more to learn!
Hi, thanks for the data. Very useful. I have a question. How do you get to play in the gated mode without the sound of the steps of the sequences. I m doing what you did but in the hardware and it jumps between the steps all the time cutting the sound
Hey Emiliano - there's a Seq Mode option in the Gated Sequencer... that needs to be set to "Key Step", in order for the sequencer to advance with each key stroke.
Thanks. The patches will only load to Rev 2, but I have confirmed that you can do the same type of voice modeling on P08. If you wanna check out the Blade Runner tutorial I did a while back, that goes through the details in more depth.... and you could design similar patches on P08. ruclips.net/video/jB9HG3k3vvQ/видео.html
@@CreativeSpiral ah man I was so eager to get the patches! 😭 I really liked those OB-Xa kind of brasses. I heard the other patches as well from the demo vid, they're phenomenal... makes me now wanna get Rev 2. but ah well, I'll definitely check out the tutorial link though!
Fantastic video, this is the one I was waiting for :) the without-with-without demos cemented the benefit. For synths without the gated sequencer, but with great mod matrix, would a small random value per-voice approximate?
Glad you enjoyed it! Yes, any synth with a Voice Number or Random mod source option can achieve at least some voice modeling. The Rev2, with the gated sequencer method and large mod matrix just allows very detailed voice modeling. But, I've built a whole bank of patches on the Deepmind using Voice Number mod source for vintage voice modeling, and plan on doing the same when I get my PolyBrute. There's some more articles on how to do this here: www.presetpatch.com/articles/voice-component-modeling
Hah... I'm editing together a video for Deepmind right now... I've got a soundset of 128 Deepmind Patches using Vintage Voice Modeling about to launch in next few days. I'll also have a couple more videos about Deepmind Voice Modeling in the next week or two... stay tuned to this channel. In the meantime, I wrote up an article a while back about Deepmind here: www.presetpatch.com/articles/voice-component-modeling
@@CreativeSpiral cool, vvm is the only thing I’m missing on the nord lead a1. There is only one s&h lfo to modulate the pitch and vcf a bit randomly on each voice...
Thanks KP! Yes, I have experimented with Voice Modeling / Per Voice Variance with VST/software synths... most recently with Massive X and a Reaktor synth I have built (Polymage 16). I will try to get around to recording a demo/tutorial of that soon. Also, FYI: uHe Diva and SonicProjects OP-X do have some limited per voice variance built into their engines... both great sounding VSTs. Cheers, Jason
@@CreativeSpiral Thanks for your reply! i forgot to say that i wanted to add this to my Rev2 favorites patch. i don't use synth soft and i'm trying to avoid computer when making music.
I dont understand how to do this. if I target osc 1 or 2 freq, it sounds completely out of tune. i cannot target fine osc tuning with the gated sequencer. can anyone help?
There's a trick using the Gated Sequencer and Mod Matrix together that allows you to get fractional modulations (ie: fine tuning)... If you look at the free demo patches, you can see how its done, or in the Blade Runner example video, I discuss it in more detail, starting around 9:00: ruclips.net/video/jB9HG3k3vvQ/видео.html
Awesome video. Can the modeling be put as a setting that is there anytime we want to create a patch from scratch? Thanks! I’m in the market for a polysynth and this might be my choice.
Thanks. There's no way to overwrite the INIT patch... but you can download the template patches I've created, and just dial them up when you want to create a new patch, then just save it to a different slot, so you don't overwrite the template. I've got lots of free VCM template patches for Prophet Rev2 and other synths here: www.PresetPatch.com/user/creativespiral
Hi ! thanks for this depth video. But I can't understand one thing. In the gate sequencer. You telling that the first two lines affect at OSC freq, But Destination 1 and 2 are set to "off". why? how does it work?
If you route from the Gated Sequencer direct to Osc1/2 frequency, the values are too coarse. The mod matrix is used as a workaround to scale down the values to appropriate amounts.. if you download the free patch examples, you can see the setup in the matrix, routing Seq1/2 to Osc1/2. Also, in my Blade Runner patch design video, I explain the setup in more detail: ruclips.net/video/jB9HG3k3vvQ/видео.html
Excellent! One minor caveat: the filter cutoff has relatively low priority on your list. But it automatically affects the A, D, R times, i.e. wouldn‘t it be more economical to put above those parameters in order to save mod slots?
Thanks Rayy! Routing offsets to filter cutoff only affects the "height" of the frequency Q point, on a per voice basis... It doesn't affect the ADR temporal timing. Also, since there are other per voice offsets already associated with cutoff (ie: filter key tracking and filter velocity), I've found the per voice routing to cutoff to be less important than the per-voice ADR variance, which affects timing of those resonant peaks and VCA volume peaks. Attack also has a downstream effect of altering the temporal offset of decay. It is still a decent idea to have per voice cutoff variance as well, but I would definitely prioritize it lower than ADR offsets.
@@CreativeSpiral Oops, my fault. Yes, ADR are defined as time, not speed parameters. On the other hand, Sequential mixes this up as well. Have you noticed that in the mod matrix you need to dial in a positive value in order to *shorten* ADR times and vice versa? I‘m not alone. :D
@@RayyMusik Yeah... the positive values = shorter times is definitely is an odd choice... I'm used to it now, but when I first got DSI/Seq instruments, it definitely confused me a few times. ;)
very cool, I like to make my own patches on my Synths and generally prefer them as I`m looking for more retro sounds these days. On my Rev2 I`ve used the LFO`s to created minor instabilities in pitch and freq etc and that`s cool but this is the next level by the looks of it so will have to try these out, cheers
Glad you enjoyed it. Yeah, lots of people try various LFO to Osc Freq methods... (I've experimented with them all) The VCM site discusses the downsides to those other approaches. (randomness at higher levels leads to wonky dissonant sounds sometimes... also, you don't get consistent behavior from session to session) With this type of VCM approach, you can carefully curate and model the voice variance of specific synths, with specific virtual voice counts in round robin behavior... and it's consistent from session to session... so a patch will sound the same when you record it and when you take the synth out on the road... (well, not so much on the road with Covid ;)
At first I want to thank you for this awesome research and work you have done for all of us. Truly inspiring!! You should get paid froom big companies for this. My question is, I want to produce the classic 80s boogie funk and I have searched the web for all info about Prophet Sound. So I compared the Rev2 against the P6, because they're somewhat "affordable" for me. With the VCM I hear you can get pretty close to the "VCO Sound"with the Rev2 to the P5 or P6. What would you do, choose the Rev2 and have the classic sound + much more possibilites or buy the P6 for the classic vco sound? I bought so many synths and was dissapointed until I found out what sound i want. Thank you
Yes, per voice variance is one of the key factors of classic poly synth sound, and VCO poly character. There are many components that give each synth a unique sound. The VCF filter implementation is one of the biggest contributors to sound, and Rev2 vs P6 definitely have some difference in filter character, though they are based on the same general OTA architecture. Sequential has been mum on the exact specifics of their vintage knob modeling (as they want to keep it somewhat a trade secret), but the general concept is the same: give per voice variance to different components (oscillators, filters, envelopes, etc..). From discussions on the forums, my interpretation is they are using more of a "randomized approach" to creating the per voice variances, where this VCM method uses a more "curated approach" to setting specific offsets per voice, per component, and defining virtual voices.
Hi. This is great. Thank you. Is there a tutorial anywhere showing how to do this on the synth it’s self? Also do you know if this also works on the OB6?
In my Blade Runner patch design video, I go through the process on Rev 2: ruclips.net/video/jB9HG3k3vvQ/видео.html (starting around 5:40) On OB-6, you can use the Vintage Knob functionality, which Sequential added in a firmware update... it uses the same methodology as these voice modeling techniques, and does a pretty good job... though I have some videos explaining how the Vintage Knob behavior could be improved as well...
Wow, really ingenious stuff here, can't wait to load these up on my rev2 and explore. Have you been approached by any synth manufacturers about this work? I would be curious to see how it compares to existing "vintage" implementations. Seems like you might be on the bleeding edge of this stuff, pretty amazing for a solo hobbyist(?). Thanks for doing the hard work so the rest of us can benefit.
Thanks @crazyhorse52395 - Yeah, the Vintage Knob algorithm that Sequential has implemented in P5/10, P6, OB6 uses this exact same methodology. I have discussed this with them on forums in the past. I have a video specifically on the current Vintage Knob behavior on P6, along with my recommendations for improvements... if you want to check it out: ruclips.net/video/G7tdp5tvopU/видео.html
@@CreativeSpiral so cool! I will absolutely check that out. Do you work with synths in a professional capacity or are they a hobby/passion for you? It seems like you’ve put a lot of valuable time and work into your research.
@@CreativeSpiral Wow, that's awesome. If you don't mind me asking, do you have a technical background? Or have you taught yourself everything about synths/sound design?
@@crazyhorse52395 Thanks bud. Yeah, definitely have a technical background having worked in robotics and programming for past 30 years. I'm self taught for synths... What got me started on my synth tech journey was being frustrated that so many synth discussions revolve around totally subjective terminology (ie: it sounds "warm, round, woody, rich, organic, lush, fat, cold, harsh, etc..) without people defining exactly what objectively they like or dislike about a synth... so I wanted to try and discover the objective/scientific differences between vintage poly synths and more modern ones. I have written up more on the topic and my other research here: www.presetpatch.com/articles/voice-component-modeling
This is a neat idea, but isn't OSC drift pr voice, meant to be modelled by the OSC slop know on the Rev-2. Or am I misunderstanding what that knob does?
I've written up a bunch of info on the subject on the VCM website and Seq forum. The short of it is that OSC Slop is a very sloppy way to offset oscillators... it produces highly artificial, exaggerated motion that you don't actually find when measuring vintage instruments. Having stable, curated offsets produces a more natural, realistic vintage character. Further, Osc variances are just one portion of the vintage voice modeling. Also offsetting cutoff, resonance, and envelope attack, decay and release timings adds a ton to organic/warm analog sound.
The slop knob targets only oscillators, missing out on per voice offsets to filter, envelopes and other parameters that create much of the vintage character. In addition, slop uses a randomized, constantly drifting tuning, which is more artificial. If you want good vintage character, then using curated, stable offsets is better... also great for acoustic ensemble patches.. you can create very realistic string and brass ensemble sounds with this type of method. Bunch more info is available on my VoiceComponentModeling.com website, if you’re interested in reading more on the topic. Cheers, J
Super cool stuff. But why does the gated sequencer say that the destination is ‘off’ in your video for sequence 1 and 2 but you describe it as modulating the Osc frequency (and, as far as I can tell, the fine frequency at that)? If I recreate the patch from the video and route sequence 1 to the osc frequency I (predictably) get different pitches when hitting the same note. If I turn the routing ‘off,’ I’m pretty sure I’m not hearing any effect at all (I tested this by using more extreme numeric values), certainly not the slight but lovely per-voice drift you have here. Sorry if this is a dumb question. Really appreciate your educational videos and helping duffers like me get the most out of this synth!
I think I figured out that you must be doing something over on the ‘modulation’ tab with sequencer as a source, osc freq as a destination, and a small amount. Guess I will actually have to download the template rather than read values off the screen in the video. Thanks for all the work deconstructing this synth!
Thanks! This video doesn't go into the entire setup process... but there are links in the description to download template patches with everything set up. The modulation for Osc Frequency is routed through the mod matrix (has to be done that way to get appropriate scaling) In the Blade Runner patch video I uploaded a while back, I go through an example of the whole setup and describe the scaling/offsets in more detail. If you wanna check that out, here's the video, and the specific VCM setup starts at about 9min: ruclips.net/video/jB9HG3k3vvQ/видео.html
So if an Analog oscillator is Digitally Controlled (DCO), then is the sound basically the same as using pure Digital? Or does the Analog Osc add any warmth at all?
The analog core oscillator gives natural analog wave shape and harmonic series, free of any digital aliasing or upper harmonic issues... for a true analog response. The clock/tuning of that analog oscillator is what's digital in DCOs, leading to perfect tuning per oscillator, per voice. (note: worth noting that digital aliasing is mostly a non-factor in modern digital/fpga/nco synths... it was more of an issue in 80s/90s/00s digital synths) (also note: modern digital oscillators, with well implemented vintage voice modeling schemes -- like Groove 3rd Wave -- can capture the great majority of "analog character" that is associated with classic/vintage analog VCO synths.)
@@CreativeSpiral so is this vintage voice modelling technique basically just setting a Defined Detune and Envelope Timing Offset between each Oscillator?
@@prcption8636 Yeah, the methodology I've been advocating for is to use "curated tables of stable offsets" that target per voice, per osc tuning, filter cutoff/res, env ADR timings, LFO rate timings, and other parameters in the synth engine which were traditionally controlled via analog circuitry back in the 70s/80s poly synth era. By having small per voice / per component offsets, it introduces a bunch of organic phasing and temporal variances that we associate with that classic/vintage analog poly character. Sequential's vintage knob uses this methodology, as does Arturia Analog Accuracy (which I helped to design/curate) and Groove 3rd Wave (which I also helped to design curate their implementation) There's some more detailed info on my www.VoiceComponentModeling.com website, and the www.PresetPatch.com site -- If you're interested in reading more on the topic.
This is fantastic stuff. So does this require a second set of voices? Does that mean the 16 voice rev2 becomes effectively an 8 voice instrument? Or is it a difference between the two DCO's within one voice?
Thanks Tom.. the standard VCM / vintage voice modeling setup doesn’t require/use and extra physical voices. If you download the example patches, they are all setup and ready for sound design. You can setup this type of voice modeling as a Stack/layered patch, which does essentially halve the physical voice count… it does produce spectacularly huge stereo/binaural fields of sound… I do recommend it ;) Lots of the patches in the two VCM sound sets I’ve created use the VCM techniques with hard panned binaural stereo stacks.. it produces a similar sound to double tracking a part, but it’s all at your fingers in a live context.
Since the gated sequencer is key to achieving the vintage sound, does this mean you will not be able to create step sequences with Poly mode for jamming using this patch?
Yeah, it uses the gated sequencer in Key Step mode. You can have a separate layer (bi-timbral patch) where one layer gives VCM vintage/analog sound and a second layer adds some animated motion using the gated sequencer in another mode.
I have a PEK... great keyboard... and have tried to work out a way to accomplish this type of voice modeling. Unfortunately, Evolver doesn't have a way.
Yeah, you can do it direct on the synth. Its just much easier with the editor. In my Blade Runner patch tutorial, starting at 5:50, you can see the whole setup process... you can follow along and do the same setup on the Rev 2... ruclips.net/video/jB9HG3k3vvQ/видео.html Also, this post on Seq forum might be helpful for you: forum.sequential.com/index.php?topic=3450.0
Hey Twomass - the patches are not backwards compatible, however, the same voice modeling techniques can be done on P08. At this link there's some more info: forum.sequential.com/index.php?topic=3450.0
@@CreativeSpiral ah you’re going for the Polybrute eh. Well I’m sure if anyone can exploit that machine it’s you for sure. Great work with this btw. i did do that Vintage knob update to my Prophet 6 and it really opened the synth up - especially when the filter is in self oscialltion.....it sounds surreal!!
Sonic Neutronic Nice choices. I have the Pro3 and prophet 6 as well as the subsequent 37. The Pro3 and prophet 6 go together like peanut butter and jelly!
![Prophet Rev 2 - Pitch Tracking Filter Resonance [Ambient Patch Tutorial]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Di2vC2CXYlw/mqdefault.jpg)
I have to admit when I finally decided to get Rev2 as my primary poly (in addition to the pure analog monster Martriarch) I was underwhelmed by how dead Rev2 sounded in comparison.. but this is actually making Rev2 usable, more over it turns it into an absolutly amazing synth worth every penny, free templates are enough to understand the concept and to build any sound one might want. I still decided to buy both packs though to appreciate your idea, thank you!
This is - by far - the most magic synth tweak I discovered in 2021. Literally incredible and so kind of you to reveal this to the world. Many many thanks ❤
just tried this on my rev2, I don't have the software so I did it manually, and it's not as hard as I thought it would be! this is such a useful trick and even if you choose to use 4 lanes in the mod matrix, there's still lots of modulation lanes left to use (including some dedicated slots for mod wheel, pressure, velocity, etc that I always forget about).
once I got it set up fully with the envelope temporal offsets and everything, it totally changed the character of the synth. it's insane how powerful the Rev2 can be when you know how to use it. definitely going to use it as an initial template for all my patches now.
Awesome! Glad you're enjoying it. Cheers, Jason
have you got any tips for me?I've tried it the same way, but it doesn't work...
:-/
This is absolutely amazing! Thank you so much for your research and knowledge sharing of this. I just bought a Rev2 (just before watching your video) and someone on a forum had glowing things to say about your VCM process so I wanted to check it out. That Blade Runner patch you made is sooooo lush and beautiful. Very creative and I hope Dave Smith saw this to see how versatile his Rev2 has become. Although, if everyone saw this there would probably be less P5, P6, and P10 sales haha
Just now coming across this video when looking for some info on my Rev2 but after recently acquiring and subsequently restoring and calibrating a Jupiter 4 this makes so much sense. Especially when you go into the resonances and how the calibration on the Jupiter was almost a spot on representation doing each voice card. I think a light bulb clicked on after seeing this and what you are doing. Going to have to go and try some of this soon. Great explanation and information!
Absolutely great stuff! And amazing that you figured this out yourself, where the manufactures could've discovered this and made better instruments... Bravo!
This is great Jason, nice video. I have created Vintage defaults in my Moog One, but these templates for the REV2 are super! top job!
Holy shit. This is amazing! Well done.
Nice! Hope some of the manufacturers take notice of your work.
Bought your patches a couple of weeks ago. It has really REVived my Rev2 and made it fun to play and explore again. Thanks!
Thanks Veggie! Glad you're enjoying the sound set!
this is what does the vintage knob on the new prophet 5.
Lower values of vintage enhance the detune between the oscillators for pitch, envelope, filter, etc...
I was sad that the Rev2 didn't get the vintage mode update like the P6, but somehow this technique seems to breathe the same life into it!
Rev2 is going on my wishlist.
Very interesting!
Wait a second I just got how this works. This is a game changer.
Immediately subscribed after watching this. I've been holding of on purchasing the Rev2 just bc of my quandary about vintage sound capabilities. This video was most helpful. Thanks for that link also.
You bet. Glad you found it helpful!
Just bought the 15 Ep patch set, thank you so much and what a deal at 10 bucks. You really saved me, I was struggeling to get a decent Ep sound, gave up and was thinking I needed to get another board like a MODX for basic pianos. Love the sounds love them love them love them, thank you thank you thank you. Rich
Hey Rich - glad you're liking the EP patches!! Cheers, Jason
This is really outstanding. Thanks so much for dropping this knowledge!
Glad you enjoyed it!
I want to thank you for sharing this.
I just received my Rev2, stoked.
I'm a bit confused, at 4:36 , in the gated sequencer in layer A, Destination 1 and Destination 2 are set to OFF, but you say they are targeting Osc Freq 1 and 2?
The mapping to Osc Freq 1 and Osc Freq 2 is done in the mod matrix instead. If you route directly via the gated sequencer, the values are too coarse... but using the mod matrix, you can scale down the values to tiny fractions, which are appropriate to get the vintage voice modeling behavior. If you look at the example patches I uploaded, you'll see the mod matrix setup. Also, in the Blade Runner sound design video I did, I go through the entire setup and discuss in more detail how the connections are made: ruclips.net/video/jB9HG3k3vvQ/видео.html (starting around 5:50)
@@CreativeSpiral please pin this comment!
You are doing God's work Sir. The Synth God of course ;)
I used to something similar like this for my Matrix-1000 using LFOs per voice
thank you very much for this free patch and detailed explanation !
on my wish list!!
Most excellent tutorial. And you're a great instructor. Thank you for this video and i hope for more to come.
Thanks Steven! Glad you found it helpful. Cheers, J
you're a synth genius mate
Thanks Nicola! Dig your channel. Lots of great covers!
@@CreativeSpiral Thanks so much, I appreciate you checking it out!
Awesome tutorial!!!!
Thank you so much 🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌
Wow this is brilliant boss!
wow .. thank you so much! I m working on loving this synth more.. this is a big step.
That's amazing! thank you for sharing
I can't believe how ignorant I was of this synth: for years we've all been going "Don't get the P8 because it's a 'thin filter'" - and although the filter is certainly a big aspect, I had zero idea there was a way to offset the sound this way on the Rev2. Literally the only thing that kept me from buying one as my main poly is the flatness of it. Thank you *very* much for the work you put in, Jason! What would you say is the technical difference between your method and the Slop function they added on the Rev2? Also, I wonder how you subjectively view the Rev2 next to the other Prophets after you've done the voice variance technique. I'm not asking for a video (although that would certainly be interesting!), but your thoughts would be appreciated. Anyway, thanks very much, and see you on the Pro3 Facebook page!
Thanks Danny - glad you've found it useful! My feeling is that per-voice variance has been the most underestimated/misunderstood characteristic of vintage poly character. People generally can only describe their preferences in very subjective terms why they prefer vintage synths. (this is what set me on my exploration in the first place... I wanted to understand objectively what is different) I have written many articles on the topic here, if you want to read more of my thoughts: ( www.presetpatch.com/articles/voice-component-modeling ) Capturing the per-voice variances with offsets to a variety of components delivers so much of the vintage poly vibe. There are, of course, many other sound differences based on VCF filter type, envelope implementation and other particulars of the electrical design. So there will always be sonic differences between synths, but my feeling is that I'm very happy with my Rev2 now, and wouldn't trade it for either a P5, P6 or OB6, even though those are more premium priced instruments. (I like to have the flagship capabilities of the Rev2 with its vastly extended modulation architecture)... I will say I do slightly prefer the SSM 4-Pole and SEM 2-Pole filters on Seqs other instruments though (I really love the Pro3 filter offerings)
SLOP (and OSC DRIFT) are what I would call "mediocre approximations" for capturing per voice variance to tuning. They are random, and constantly in motion (an artificial type of motion, if compared with measurements of actual vintage synths after they have warmed up) Slop and Drift work okay for sounds with very quick ADR stages, but for any sound design with extended periods (pads, strings, brass), they introduce a bunch of extra artificial type of motion. In addition, Slop and Drift (and random LFO methods) at higher values will sometimes lead to weird moments of extreme dissonance, which can be avoided with Voice Modeling with curated offsets. And finally, Slop/Drift/Random LFOs don't give you repeatable performance characteristics from session to session. (ie: you might have a recording session where everything randomly aligns to sound beautiful, but then take that same patch on the road, and the randomness gives you a different sounding beast) And of course, SLOP just targets Osc Freq... the Voice Modeling paradigm includes Envelope ADR temporal variances, and other offsets to components as well.
@@CreativeSpiral Very comprehensive, thank you. Even given that it's all subjective, it's much easier to be steered when you know you're listening to someone who's very invested in the issue. This really swings me in favour of just pulling the trigger on the Rev (unless KORG releases a Prologu with a sequencer and some more modulation, which would be incredible). I actually agree fully about the Slop function: I understand its mathematics less and less. As an example, I have a Pro 3 patch where one LFO modulates the actual pitch of all three oscillators with Intensity set to just 1 and the Rate set at about 70 (a violin/cello vibration, basically), and you know what - it sounds *way* more natural than Oscillator Slop, which goes from barely noticeable to suddenly very unnatural. So we're in complete agreement there. I've discovered that ultra-light pitch modulations at 1-2 intensity sound much more Boards of Canada, if you will, than any oscillator slop I've ever tried. Thanks again for the thoughts and the link to the full version, I'll make sure to have a read tonight!
Sounds great man, thanks for sharing your knowledge. I’m going to be getting a Rev2 soon, can’t wait to try this out
Glad you enjoyed it. Rev 2 is a great synth!
Thanks for this I've been looking for something like this. My take 5 has it but 5 voices isn't as grand as 8 lol
Interesting concept. This kind of thing is something I have been doing for many years on VCO based synths - as a technique to push them more towards the behaviour of acoustic instruments. In particular my Alesis Andromeda has a per voice random modulation source which can be useful for this sort of thing. I think the Deepmind also has parameter randomisation on a per voice basis built in as a dedicated control. Some vintage analogue synths such as the minimoog are so variable in this respect you don't need to program it deliberately, it just happens anyway! Sample and hold triggered by note on can also generate a new value for every note, which is even more lively than per voice variance. However there is still something about DCO based synths that is different to my ears. the oscillator sound is thinner and less substantial, transients are more precise and they behave differently in a mix. The more instances you use in a mix the more pronounced the differences between DCO and VCO become. Anyway interesting ideas thanks.
Hey David - Yeah, I have done a ton of research on the topic of voice variance in vintage and modern synths... the Deepmind's Osc Drift and Parameter Drift algorithms are both based on random drifting motion. The downside of these (as well as Seq's Osc Slop), is that its introducing an extra layer of artificial motion into the equation. Based on the research I've done, the key is to create curated, stable per voice offsets. With the Slop/Drift/Parameter Drift methods, you get artificial drifting motion added in which is unrealistic, you'll get moments of odd dissonance at med/higher values due to random nature and phasing, and these methods don't produce repeatable performance as voices are cycles, or from session to session. I've also experimented extensively with other methods like LFO random (S+H) and other tricks... they all have the downsides associated with randomness. All of this is discussed in more detail on the VCM website: www.VoiceComponentModeling.com
That's interesting that Andromeda has a voice mod source... I didn't know that. Always wanted an Andromeda :) Voice as a source is definitely a good way to implement VCM type of techniques though... that's what I use on Deepmind, and now on PolyBrute.
@@CreativeSpiral its an interesting topic and I agree that random based pitch and other parameter slop is not entirely natural, you have to be subtle with it but I think it helps to liven things up. My own interest is based on the behaviour of acoustic instruments as applied to analogue synths. So its interesting that you mention trying to make a performance 'repeatable' in terms of the voice offsets. Acoustic instrument performance is never repeatable at the kind of micro level we are talking about. Actually I like that.
I think a lot of synth makers have thought about this issue - for example my Sub37 has an osc drift parameter, which I think is actually a per note random offset to pitch. My Macbeth M5n has an oscillator 'stability' control which seems to introduce some variability into the oscillator tracking across the keyboard. Thanks for the link I will look through your website with interest. Always more to learn!
Hi, thanks for the data. Very useful. I have a question. How do you get to play in the gated mode without the sound of the steps of the sequences. I m doing what you did but in the hardware and it jumps between the steps all the time cutting the sound
Hey Emiliano - there's a Seq Mode option in the Gated Sequencer... that needs to be set to "Key Step", in order for the sequencer to advance with each key stroke.
thanks ... very nice !
absolutely legendary
Thanks Connor!
Great design! Can these work on the Prophet '08 PE model?
Thanks. The patches will only load to Rev 2, but I have confirmed that you can do the same type of voice modeling on P08. If you wanna check out the Blade Runner tutorial I did a while back, that goes through the details in more depth.... and you could design similar patches on P08. ruclips.net/video/jB9HG3k3vvQ/видео.html
@@CreativeSpiral ah man I was so eager to get the patches! 😭 I really liked those OB-Xa kind of brasses. I heard the other patches as well from the demo vid, they're phenomenal... makes me now wanna get Rev 2. but ah well, I'll definitely check out the tutorial link though!
Fantastic video, this is the one I was waiting for :) the without-with-without demos cemented the benefit. For synths without the gated sequencer, but with great mod matrix, would a small random value per-voice approximate?
Glad you enjoyed it! Yes, any synth with a Voice Number or Random mod source option can achieve at least some voice modeling. The Rev2, with the gated sequencer method and large mod matrix just allows very detailed voice modeling. But, I've built a whole bank of patches on the Deepmind using Voice Number mod source for vintage voice modeling, and plan on doing the same when I get my PolyBrute. There's some more articles on how to do this here: www.presetpatch.com/articles/voice-component-modeling
Great work!
Thanks AM!
5:13 now I am in the game! never knew this possibilities of the rev 2. YES! Can the Deepmind do the same things?
Hah... I'm editing together a video for Deepmind right now... I've got a soundset of 128 Deepmind Patches using Vintage Voice Modeling about to launch in next few days. I'll also have a couple more videos about Deepmind Voice Modeling in the next week or two... stay tuned to this channel. In the meantime, I wrote up an article a while back about Deepmind here: www.presetpatch.com/articles/voice-component-modeling
@@CreativeSpiral cool, vvm is the only thing I’m missing on the nord lead a1. There is only one s&h lfo to modulate the pitch and vcf a bit randomly on each voice...
Deepmind Vintage VCM Soundset is now live: ruclips.net/video/reBicog8JSU/видео.html
great video! is it possible to do that without the software? if yes, could you make a tutorial? i would love to add this to my favorites patches.
Thanks KP! Yes, I have experimented with Voice Modeling / Per Voice Variance with VST/software synths... most recently with Massive X and a Reaktor synth I have built (Polymage 16). I will try to get around to recording a demo/tutorial of that soon. Also, FYI: uHe Diva and SonicProjects OP-X do have some limited per voice variance built into their engines... both great sounding VSTs. Cheers, Jason
@@CreativeSpiral Thanks for your reply! i forgot to say that i wanted to add this to my Rev2 favorites patch. i don't use synth soft and i'm trying to avoid computer when making music.
I dont understand how to do this. if I target osc 1 or 2 freq, it sounds completely out of tune. i cannot target fine osc tuning with the gated sequencer. can anyone help?
There's a trick using the Gated Sequencer and Mod Matrix together that allows you to get fractional modulations (ie: fine tuning)... If you look at the free demo patches, you can see how its done, or in the Blade Runner example video, I discuss it in more detail, starting around 9:00: ruclips.net/video/jB9HG3k3vvQ/видео.html
I've found it on the sequential forum thanks a lot!
Awesome video. Can the modeling be put as a setting that is there anytime we want to create a patch from scratch? Thanks! I’m in the market for a polysynth and this might be my choice.
Thanks. There's no way to overwrite the INIT patch... but you can download the template patches I've created, and just dial them up when you want to create a new patch, then just save it to a different slot, so you don't overwrite the template. I've got lots of free VCM template patches for Prophet Rev2 and other synths here: www.PresetPatch.com/user/creativespiral
@@CreativeSpiral thanks a lot for your reply, I think I will get my Rev2 on Sunday and I will definitely come back to you, thanks man!
Hi ! thanks for this depth video. But I can't understand one thing. In the gate sequencer. You telling that the first two lines affect at OSC freq, But Destination 1 and 2 are set to "off". why? how does it work?
If you route from the Gated Sequencer direct to Osc1/2 frequency, the values are too coarse. The mod matrix is used as a workaround to scale down the values to appropriate amounts.. if you download the free patch examples, you can see the setup in the matrix, routing Seq1/2 to Osc1/2. Also, in my Blade Runner patch design video, I explain the setup in more detail: ruclips.net/video/jB9HG3k3vvQ/видео.html
@@CreativeSpiral thanks a lot! now I understand :)
Excellent! One minor caveat: the filter cutoff has relatively low priority on your list. But it automatically affects the A, D, R times, i.e. wouldn‘t it be more economical to put above those parameters in order to save mod slots?
Thanks Rayy! Routing offsets to filter cutoff only affects the "height" of the frequency Q point, on a per voice basis... It doesn't affect the ADR temporal timing. Also, since there are other per voice offsets already associated with cutoff (ie: filter key tracking and filter velocity), I've found the per voice routing to cutoff to be less important than the per-voice ADR variance, which affects timing of those resonant peaks and VCA volume peaks. Attack also has a downstream effect of altering the temporal offset of decay. It is still a decent idea to have per voice cutoff variance as well, but I would definitely prioritize it lower than ADR offsets.
@@CreativeSpiral Oops, my fault. Yes, ADR are defined as time, not speed parameters. On the other hand, Sequential mixes this up as well. Have you noticed that in the mod matrix you need to dial in a positive value in order to *shorten* ADR times and vice versa? I‘m not alone. :D
@@RayyMusik Yeah... the positive values = shorter times is definitely is an odd choice... I'm used to it now, but when I first got DSI/Seq instruments, it definitely confused me a few times. ;)
very cool, I like to make my own patches on my Synths and generally prefer them as I`m looking for more retro sounds these days. On my Rev2 I`ve used the LFO`s to created minor instabilities in pitch and freq etc and that`s cool but this is the next level by the looks of it so will have to try these out, cheers
Glad you enjoyed it. Yeah, lots of people try various LFO to Osc Freq methods... (I've experimented with them all) The VCM site discusses the downsides to those other approaches. (randomness at higher levels leads to wonky dissonant sounds sometimes... also, you don't get consistent behavior from session to session) With this type of VCM approach, you can carefully curate and model the voice variance of specific synths, with specific virtual voice counts in round robin behavior... and it's consistent from session to session... so a patch will sound the same when you record it and when you take the synth out on the road... (well, not so much on the road with Covid ;)
At first I want to thank you for this awesome research and work you have done for all of us. Truly inspiring!! You should get paid froom big companies for this.
My question is, I want to produce the classic 80s boogie funk and I have searched the web for all info about Prophet Sound. So I compared the Rev2 against the P6, because they're somewhat "affordable" for me. With the VCM I hear you can get pretty close to the "VCO Sound"with the Rev2 to the P5 or P6. What would you do, choose the Rev2 and have the classic sound + much more possibilites or buy the P6 for the classic vco sound? I bought so many synths and was dissapointed until I found out what sound i want. Thank you
Does this bring the rev2 more into the sonic territory of the p6?
Also is this similar to how the new Vintage knob works on the P6?
Yes, per voice variance is one of the key factors of classic poly synth sound, and VCO poly character. There are many components that give each synth a unique sound. The VCF filter implementation is one of the biggest contributors to sound, and Rev2 vs P6 definitely have some difference in filter character, though they are based on the same general OTA architecture.
Sequential has been mum on the exact specifics of their vintage knob modeling (as they want to keep it somewhat a trade secret), but the general concept is the same: give per voice variance to different components (oscillators, filters, envelopes, etc..). From discussions on the forums, my interpretation is they are using more of a "randomized approach" to creating the per voice variances, where this VCM method uses a more "curated approach" to setting specific offsets per voice, per component, and defining virtual voices.
Hi, I bought the sound pack last year, I've upgraded my Macbook and can't find my original order to download the patches again... how do I get access?
Shoot me an email with your name/email address you used (to jason@creativespiral.com), and I'll resend you the files.
Hi. This is great. Thank you.
Is there a tutorial anywhere showing how to do this on the synth it’s self?
Also do you know if this also works on the OB6?
In my Blade Runner patch design video, I go through the process on Rev 2: ruclips.net/video/jB9HG3k3vvQ/видео.html (starting around 5:40) On OB-6, you can use the Vintage Knob functionality, which Sequential added in a firmware update... it uses the same methodology as these voice modeling techniques, and does a pretty good job... though I have some videos explaining how the Vintage Knob behavior could be improved as well...
Wow, really ingenious stuff here, can't wait to load these up on my rev2 and explore. Have you been approached by any synth manufacturers about this work? I would be curious to see how it compares to existing "vintage" implementations. Seems like you might be on the bleeding edge of this stuff, pretty amazing for a solo hobbyist(?). Thanks for doing the hard work so the rest of us can benefit.
Thanks @crazyhorse52395 - Yeah, the Vintage Knob algorithm that Sequential has implemented in P5/10, P6, OB6 uses this exact same methodology. I have discussed this with them on forums in the past. I have a video specifically on the current Vintage Knob behavior on P6, along with my recommendations for improvements... if you want to check it out: ruclips.net/video/G7tdp5tvopU/видео.html
@@CreativeSpiral so cool! I will absolutely check that out. Do you work with synths in a professional capacity or are they a hobby/passion for you? It seems like you’ve put a lot of valuable time and work into your research.
@@crazyhorse52395 Just a hobby... though I do release Sound Sets / Patch Banks for instruments.
@@CreativeSpiral Wow, that's awesome. If you don't mind me asking, do you have a technical background? Or have you taught yourself everything about synths/sound design?
@@crazyhorse52395 Thanks bud. Yeah, definitely have a technical background having worked in robotics and programming for past 30 years. I'm self taught for synths... What got me started on my synth tech journey was being frustrated that so many synth discussions revolve around totally subjective terminology (ie: it sounds "warm, round, woody, rich, organic, lush, fat, cold, harsh, etc..) without people defining exactly what objectively they like or dislike about a synth... so I wanted to try and discover the objective/scientific differences between vintage poly synths and more modern ones. I have written up more on the topic and my other research here: www.presetpatch.com/articles/voice-component-modeling
This is a neat idea, but isn't OSC drift pr voice, meant to be modelled by the OSC slop know on the Rev-2. Or am I misunderstanding what that knob does?
I've written up a bunch of info on the subject on the VCM website and Seq forum. The short of it is that OSC Slop is a very sloppy way to offset oscillators... it produces highly artificial, exaggerated motion that you don't actually find when measuring vintage instruments. Having stable, curated offsets produces a more natural, realistic vintage character. Further, Osc variances are just one portion of the vintage voice modeling. Also offsetting cutoff, resonance, and envelope attack, decay and release timings adds a ton to organic/warm analog sound.
How is this different from what the "slop" knob does?
The slop knob targets only oscillators, missing out on per voice offsets to filter, envelopes and other parameters that create much of the vintage character. In addition, slop uses a randomized, constantly drifting tuning, which is more artificial. If you want good vintage character, then using curated, stable offsets is better... also great for acoustic ensemble patches.. you can create very realistic string and brass ensemble sounds with this type of method. Bunch more info is available on my VoiceComponentModeling.com website, if you’re interested in reading more on the topic. Cheers, J
Super cool stuff. But why does the gated sequencer say that the destination is ‘off’ in your video for sequence 1 and 2 but you describe it as modulating the Osc frequency (and, as far as I can tell, the fine frequency at that)? If I recreate the patch from the video and route sequence 1 to the osc frequency I (predictably) get different pitches when hitting the same note. If I turn the routing ‘off,’ I’m pretty sure I’m not hearing any effect at all (I tested this by using more extreme numeric values), certainly not the slight but lovely per-voice drift you have here.
Sorry if this is a dumb question. Really appreciate your educational videos and helping duffers like me get the most out of this synth!
I think I figured out that you must be doing something over on the ‘modulation’ tab with sequencer as a source, osc freq as a destination, and a small amount. Guess I will actually have to download the template rather than read values off the screen in the video. Thanks for all the work deconstructing this synth!
Thanks! This video doesn't go into the entire setup process... but there are links in the description to download template patches with everything set up. The modulation for Osc Frequency is routed through the mod matrix (has to be done that way to get appropriate scaling) In the Blade Runner patch video I uploaded a while back, I go through an example of the whole setup and describe the scaling/offsets in more detail. If you wanna check that out, here's the video, and the specific VCM setup starts at about 9min: ruclips.net/video/jB9HG3k3vvQ/видео.html
So if an Analog oscillator is Digitally Controlled (DCO), then is the sound basically the same as using pure Digital? Or does the Analog Osc add any warmth at all?
The analog core oscillator gives natural analog wave shape and harmonic series, free of any digital aliasing or upper harmonic issues... for a true analog response. The clock/tuning of that analog oscillator is what's digital in DCOs, leading to perfect tuning per oscillator, per voice. (note: worth noting that digital aliasing is mostly a non-factor in modern digital/fpga/nco synths... it was more of an issue in 80s/90s/00s digital synths) (also note: modern digital oscillators, with well implemented vintage voice modeling schemes -- like Groove 3rd Wave -- can capture the great majority of "analog character" that is associated with classic/vintage analog VCO synths.)
@@CreativeSpiral so is this vintage voice modelling technique basically just setting a Defined Detune and Envelope Timing Offset between each Oscillator?
@@prcption8636 Yeah, the methodology I've been advocating for is to use "curated tables of stable offsets" that target per voice, per osc tuning, filter cutoff/res, env ADR timings, LFO rate timings, and other parameters in the synth engine which were traditionally controlled via analog circuitry back in the 70s/80s poly synth era. By having small per voice / per component offsets, it introduces a bunch of organic phasing and temporal variances that we associate with that classic/vintage analog poly character. Sequential's vintage knob uses this methodology, as does Arturia Analog Accuracy (which I helped to design/curate) and Groove 3rd Wave (which I also helped to design curate their implementation) There's some more detailed info on my www.VoiceComponentModeling.com website, and the www.PresetPatch.com site -- If you're interested in reading more on the topic.
This is fantastic stuff.
So does this require a second set of voices? Does that mean the 16 voice rev2 becomes effectively an 8 voice instrument?
Or is it a difference between the two DCO's within one voice?
Thanks Tom.. the standard VCM / vintage voice modeling setup doesn’t require/use and extra physical voices. If you download the example patches, they are all setup and ready for sound design. You can setup this type of voice modeling as a Stack/layered patch, which does essentially halve the physical voice count… it does produce spectacularly huge stereo/binaural fields of sound… I do recommend it ;) Lots of the patches in the two VCM sound sets I’ve created use the VCM techniques with hard panned binaural stereo stacks.. it produces a similar sound to double tracking a part, but it’s all at your fingers in a live context.
@@CreativeSpiral thanks. do you know if this can be done with the Prophet 08 ?
@@tomphillpotts Yes, these techniques can work on P08 as well. Some discussion here: forum.sequential.com/index.php?topic=3450.0
Since the gated sequencer is key to achieving the vintage sound, does this mean you will not be able to create step sequences with Poly mode for jamming using this patch?
Yeah, it uses the gated sequencer in Key Step mode. You can have a separate layer (bi-timbral patch) where one layer gives VCM vintage/analog sound and a second layer adds some animated motion using the gated sequencer in another mode.
what software are u using? i looked for one and it was bogus
I use the SoundTower Prophet Rev 2 Editor software to do deep editing / sound design on my Rev 2 synth.
Is this VCM technique applicable to Poly Evolver?
I have a PEK... great keyboard... and have tried to work out a way to accomplish this type of voice modeling. Unfortunately, Evolver doesn't have a way.
thanks for the reply! @@CreativeSpiral
Can you do this without the software? If so can you please explain how?
Yeah, you can do it direct on the synth. Its just much easier with the editor. In my Blade Runner patch tutorial, starting at 5:50, you can see the whole setup process... you can follow along and do the same setup on the Rev 2... ruclips.net/video/jB9HG3k3vvQ/видео.html Also, this post on Seq forum might be helpful for you: forum.sequential.com/index.php?topic=3450.0
@CreativeSpiral Thank you so much! I'm watching your Blade Runner Patch video and I see how to do it now. Again, thank you!
Hi there. I have sent you a pm on the dsi forum. Have you received my message? Kind regards.
Hey Gernot! Just saw your msg and responded. Cheers - J
@@CreativeSpiral thank you Jason!
Hello Chief. Are these compatible with Prophet08?
Hey Twomass - the patches are not backwards compatible, however, the same voice modeling techniques can be done on P08. At this link there's some more info: forum.sequential.com/index.php?topic=3450.0
@@CreativeSpiral Thanks. Really appreciated :)
Very nice but I can’t follow this time.... sold my Rev 2 on New Year’s Day in a clear out rage lol 😂
Doh! Hope that clear out rage was followed by some GAS acquisition! (or in your case, maybe some camera gear ;) I'm eagerly awaiting PolyBrute.
@@CreativeSpiral I bought some lights hahah but it was a gear purchase. Lol
Just pro 3 prophet 6 and odyssey here now.
@@CreativeSpiral ah you’re going for the Polybrute eh. Well I’m sure if anyone can exploit that machine it’s you for sure. Great work with this btw.
i did do that Vintage knob update to my Prophet 6 and it really opened the synth up - especially when the filter is in self oscialltion.....it sounds surreal!!
Sonic Neutronic
Nice choices.
I have the Pro3 and prophet 6 as well as the subsequent 37.
The Pro3 and prophet 6 go together like peanut butter and jelly!
@@fuenstock They sure do. It's the perfect combo for me. I also let my Subsequent 37 go on NY Day...lol....
Outstanding, thank you for sharing!