mr bug---- regarding your analogy---many cars have a choice of engine sizes. sometimes engines are even swapped if there is room under the hood. Look inside your PEK---(remove the 4 screws) --- the case obviously could house double the electronics. it would be nice to have the option.
Currently i have both a PEK and a PER --it is NOT a convienient solution, and is really overkill to just add voices.
--- In DSI_Evolver@yahoogroups.com, "bug.out" > wrote:
>
> y'all knew this when ya bought it. i wish my six cyl was eight, but ya know...
>
> --
> bug.out
> if only you could see what i've seen with your eyes
>
>
> On Apr 9, 2010, at 5:55 PM, wasteking1 wrote:
>
> > it appears there are two schools of synth playing--- those who approach it as a 'sound engineer' or 'programmer' and others who approach a keyboard as a 'piano player.
> > The programmers are happy with one note at time , creating complex sounds , and layer and sequence them if necessary.
> > The 'piano players' think in terms of chords and using many fingers to create harmony. WHY SHOULDNT AN INSTRUMENT ACCOMODATE BOTH?
> >
> > it seems that the classic (1980's) minimum number of voices for a polysynth has been SIX--- to allow for two hands/ two triads. This would allow you to play LIVE in a 'pianolike way' pretty much unhindered. Additional voices beyond this are nice, but extra.
> > indeed, NOT ALL SYNTH USE IS BY PURE PROGRAMMERS-- some people play live, and the PEK does have a wonderful tone compared to some other synths on the market . But 4 voices is a weird number for live playing. If the PEK is designed as a 'keyboard' then one would think it should accomodate live 'piano playing' rather than just as a studio programming tool. That is my rationale for having at least 6 internal voices--- to allow the unit LIVE PLAYING FLEXIBILITY. I dont see why this concept is put down as 'whining' by some here, it however is a valid criticism of an otherwise wonderful instrument.[certainly as valid as pots vs. encoders.]
> >
> >
> > --- In DSI_Evolver@yahoogroups.com, oogie boogie @> wrote:
> >>
> >> Guys, look, the subject was over and done long before some of you started whining about it. I use an MEK, and have since before this list was started. I know Dave personally was one of the folks that suggested the PEK be made before the PER was even released, and yes as a 4-voice. How many of you whiners have ever actually hooked up a PEK and a PER and used eight voices simultaneously? Dave came out with the MED as a monosynth for a good reason: complex tones that stand on their own. The 4-voice in many cases is barely usable because if all the crazy interfrequency modulation that occurs between tones in anything but the simplest of voices. Seriously, wake up folks, and stop whining. Why do you think Dave did a Prophet in 8-voice? Because the voices are simple enough to fit together and work in a mix. An 8-layer Evolver tone? Next to useless wall of sounds the closely borders noise. Most of you asking for an 8-voice Evolver probably don't do
> >> a whole lot of sound design. My guess is that most of you are players that just want to do bigger chordal voicings on the big keyboard. Chances are you're not sound engineers and probably don't know a whole lot about leaving room in the frequency spectrum for other sounds to occur. So here's my two cents: if you want to do polyphony, get a Prophet-8. The tones fit together better for chords. If you're really desperate, sample the PEK. Seriously though, this is old. Get out there, get playing and make good music. Good luck.
> >>
> >>
> >> I
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
>; >
> >
>
Message
Re: [DSI Synths] Re: how many voices for PEK
2010-04-10 by Ravi Ivan Sharma
I think many may be missing economic theory and realities in this discussion.
Price per unit was a huge factor I am sure. At some point it becomes so expensive, the drop off in demand far outweighs the increase in profit per unit. And if you decrease your profit per unit too much, you still get killed. It's not a science, and if you get it wrong: dead company. Dave has some experience in this we all know.
I am very happy that DSI is still going. Because then, you never know, the 6 or eight voice might be able to happen later when the risk is either less because of some change economic factors or such a risk has less chance to sink the whole boat if it is proven to be wrong looking backwards.
The fact that DSI is still going years after releasing the PEK and has not discontinued it for other products is some level of proof (whether you like it or not) that the decisions were Dave made were not unsound.
(like the pun?) :)
Have a good weekend!
On Apr 9, 2010, at 8:25 PM, wasteking1 wrote: