Dave Smith Instruments SYNTHESIZERS

> Hi Gene,
> 
> I will chime in to say that as a fellow evolverist I can understand
> and relate to your position on this.
> 
> I own only an original mono evolver. But from my standpoint, a big
> attraction of upgrading to poly-something would be tweaking 4 parallel
> sequences with different timbres and inflections, working in harmony.
> It sounds like the limitation you mention makes this rather tricky.
> 
> Anyway, I am very happy with my evolver... but I hope you are not
> feeling like a voice in the wilderness :).
> 
> cheers
> Graeme
> 


Well, I'm a little surprised that more people weren't expecting this
feature. I am getting the impression that nothing is going to happen with
it...

I don¹t dislike the pek at all. With room for 1 keyboard though, I'm not
sure that it's the one I wanted given this unexpected limitation. I'm also
not sure why I needed to have spent $1000 more for the pek over the mek.



> 
> 
> --- In DSI_Evolver@yahoogroups.com, Gene Schwartz <implode7@...> wrote:
>> 
>>> Gene Schwartz <implode7@...> writes:
>>>> I really like this instrument. I have room for one keyboard in
> this apt -
>>>> had I known about this limitation, would I have chosen the Andromeda
>>>> instead? Yes. 
>>> 
>>> If a super-well-implemented multi-timbral mode is more important
> to you
>>> than the sound, you may be better off with a VA synth or rompler.
>>> 
>> 
>> I didn't mean to suggest anything close to that. Obviously I'm
> interested in
>> the sound because I went out of my way to chose an instrument that
> is partly
>> analog and has much analog flavor. I don't think I can get that in a va.
>> 
>> We're not talking about a well implemented multitimbral mode - we're
>> essential talking about it having one or not having one. If I had to
> chose
>> between the polyevolver and a va (that I know of), I'd chose the
>> polyevolver. 
>> 
>> It always seems that on these lists, if you say that there is one
> feature
>> whose deficiency really impacts your use of an instrument, people
> are always
>> ready to suggest that maybe you should get another type of instrument
>> altogether, or maybe take up juggling.
>> 
>> I also made the point that given the implementation, the monoevolver
> seems
>> like a much better deal.
>> 
>> In any case - if you don't think that this is an issue, that's perfectly
>> cool. It is for me. I like the sound. I don't want a va. Anything
>> contradictory there?
>> 
>> 
>>> Something like the NL3 for instance, has a _far_ slicker, better
> thought
>>> out, and more solid multi-timbral mode than the poly-evolver, not to
>>> mention more polyphony and a lot less weight.  The only problem is ...
>>> it doesn't sound like an Evolver (though it has a rather nice sound of
>>> its own).
>>> 
>> 
>> I can't stand the nord sound. I don't want a Virus. Sorry. I don't
> want to
>> have to argue this point.
>>