Dave Smith Instruments SYNTHESIZERS

>So what would the evolver add that i can't cover elsewheres?
>
1) A tunable feedback system built into the synth.

2) An integrated 4 track sequencer that reaches right into the guts of the 
synth engine, for excellent sequenced parameter steps.

3) Three envelopes and four LFOs, for even more animation in the sounds.

4) processing of external audio using all of the above.

Looking at your current setup, I think it'd go with what you already have 
quite nicely.... its got a "sound" that seems (to me) quite similar to what 
you seem to like, (if you like the mwxt, you'll like the evolver) but with a 
range of different parameters, and a different approach to working.

Anyway, isn't there a money back guarantee (less shipping) on the synth at 
the moment? Get it. I really doubt you'll be sending it back.




julian




"Give a man a stick of gum and he will chew for a day. Teach him how to 
scrape gum off stuff and he will chew for a lifetime"


_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

One final thing I have to say: This will kill your pro-one.
*****
Heh, damn thing is already killed :(  Any techs on here wanna fix it on the 
cheap for me? :)  I had someone lined up, but they just had a kid, so i 
think they'll be a bit busy these days.

In what way do you mean it will kill it though?  As in, run the P1 through 
the Evolver as an efx or as in it'll kill it in sound quality?  Not to 
offend, but i'm skeptical it can touch that beautiful P1 bass...

klown

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

Well, I've never used a Pro-one, but judging from other users who 
speak of it, it's a really punchy synth...punchy isn't really what 
comes to mind when I think of the evolver...hmm, maybe I should 
suggest that if possible, the envelopes be sped up. I would hope the 
DSP's usage could be optimized to get the attack times shorter, 
although with other hopeful features like waveshape interpolation, 
delay interpolation, etc. maybe that's just wishful thinking. I don't 
really care, I've got a Pulse and a DX100 and they've got all the 
punch I could care for. But it would be cool to be able to use the 
evo for those really snappy basslines with the CEM filter flavor. 


--- In DSI_Evolver@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Ivan Sharma" 
<noision1@h...> wrote:
> Hmmm you got me there. I don't have a p1 and its been a while since 
I used one. Anyone here want to comment on the bass of the P1 vs. 
Evolver?
> 
> Ravi
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: mr klown 
>   To: DSI_Evolver@yahoogroups.com 
>   Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 11:35 PM
>   Subject: Re: [Evolver] Tell me why i should get it...
> 
> 
>   One final thing I have to say: This will kill your pro-one.
>   *****
>   Heh, damn thing is already killed :(  Any techs on here wanna fix 
it on the 
>   cheap for me? :)  I had someone lined up, but they just had a 
kid, so i 
>   think they'll be a bit busy these days.
> 
>   In what way do you mean it will kill it though?  As in, run the 
P1 through 
>   the Evolver as an efx or as in it'll kill it in sound quality?  
Not to 
>   offend, but i'm skeptical it can touch that beautiful P1 bass...
> 
>   klown
> 
>   _________________________________________________________________
>   Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. 
>   http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
> 
> 
>   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>   DSI_Evolver-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> 
> 
> 
>   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of 
Service.

On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 05:59:02 -0000, "thligrdd <onthesurface@...>"
<onthesurface@...> wrote:

>Well, I've never used a Pro-one, but judging from other users who 
>speak of it, it's a really punchy synth...punchy isn't really what 
>comes to mind when I think of the evolver...hmm, maybe I should 
>suggest that if possible, the envelopes be sped up. I would hope the 
>DSP's usage could be optimized to get the attack times shorter, 

My gut feeling is that is it the exponential decay shape, not the
attack time that is preventing those really zappy basses. I have got
very close to the sound I like (and could normally get easily) by
using envelope 3 in conjunction with the filter envelope to add an
extra "oomph" at the start of a filter blip. The two envelopes
together make a pretty punchy sound although, I admit, not "Pulse
Punchy".... ;-)

Other things that seem to affect punchiness are the keyboard tracking
of the filter (set this quite low) and the relationship of decay time
and sustain level - normally my filter envelope would have a zero
sustain but this just kills the sound too much because of the decay
shape. Am I making sense? Anyway, the third envelope is the key to me
- with the Evolver there's a way of doing "everything" - you just have
to figure it out <g>

Paul
---
Paul Nagle - SoftRoom Music - www.softroom.co.uk

Hi,

>I have got
> very close to the sound I like (and could normally get easily) by
> using envelope 3 in conjunction with the filter envelope to add an
> extra "oomph" at the start of a filter blip. The two envelopes
> together make a pretty punchy sound although, I admit, not "Pulse
> Punchy".... ;-)

Can you explain how you use envelope 3 in conjunction with the filter 
envelope ?

Thanks

--- In DSI_Evolver@yahoogroups.com, Paul Nagle <paul@s...> wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 05:59:02 -0000, "thligrdd <onthesurface@c...>"
> <onthesurface@c...> wrote:
> 
> >Well, I've never used a Pro-one, but judging from other users who 
> >speak of it, it's a really punchy synth...punchy isn't really what 
> >comes to mind when I think of the evolver...hmm, maybe I should 
> >suggest that if possible, the envelopes be sped up. I would hope 
the 
> >DSP's usage could be optimized to get the attack times shorter, 
> 
> My gut feeling is that is it the exponential decay shape, not the
> attack time that is preventing those really zappy basses. I have got
> very close to the sound I like (and could normally get easily) by
> using envelope 3 in conjunction with the filter envelope to add an
> extra "oomph" at the start of a filter blip. The two envelopes
> together make a pretty punchy sound although, I admit, not "Pulse
> Punchy".... ;-)
> 
> Other things that seem to affect punchiness are the keyboard 
tracking
> of the filter (set this quite low) and the relationship of decay 
time
> and sustain level - normally my filter envelope would have a zero
> sustain but this just kills the sound too much because of the decay
> shape. Am I making sense? Anyway, the third envelope is the key to 
me
> - with the Evolver there's a way of doing "everything" - you just 
have

> to figure it out <g>
> 
> Paul
> ---
> Paul Nagle - SoftRoom Music - www.softroom.co.uk

On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 09:17:02 -0000, "dragoh75 <dragoh75@...>"
<dragoh75@...> wrote:

>Can you explain how you use envelope 3 in conjunction with the filter 
>envelope ?

Sure, you just give it the same destination as the filter envelope
(cutoff) and set up a slightly different shape. I would tend to create
a more sloping filter envelope with a decay that is a little slower
than normal and decaying to a non-zero sustain level. Balancing filter
envelope amount, cutoff and keyfollow gets a nice feel. Then, to
introduce extra "zap", create a much shorter envelope in envelope 3
decaying quickly to zero and point this at cutoff too. The extra zap
will make quite a difference, I find. Another good trick is to use one
of the free modulation slots to have a small amount of resonance
modulation controlled by an envelope too - this works best with the 4
pole filter as the 2 pole doesn't seem very responsive to resonance.

It would probably be easier still if envelope decay was a modulation
destination.

Does that help?

Paul
---
Paul Nagle - SoftRoom Music - www.softroom.co.uk

On 12/9/02 11:11 PM, "Ravi Ivan Sharma" <noision1@...> wrote:

> GET IT! My second one #00177 has already shipped.
> 
> Ravi

Man Ravi your get your second before I even get my first (# 178, ETA
Thursday)

klown - Think of it as a new playground and sandbox to play it.  It is wrong
I believe to look at something like Evolver as how it fits into this or that
kit.  Its a different thing!  Integrated feedback around a hybrid synth?
Unless you are already into twisted multi-module effects/synth "networks" I
think the Evolver will add a lot of new creative possibilities.  And on its
"off days" it can be a pretty mean analog monosynth.  Shoot I think it is
worth it just as an effects box.


drk

www.delora.com/music
www.mp3.com/zdrk
drk.iuma.com

On 12/10/02 3:14 AM, "Paul Nagle" <paul@...> wrote:

> My gut feeling is that is it the exponential decay shape, not the
> attack time that is preventing those really zappy basses. I have got
> very close to the sound I like (and could normally get easily) by
> using envelope 3 in conjunction with the filter envelope to add an
> extra "oomph" at the start of a filter blip. The two envelopes
> together make a pretty punchy sound although, I admit, not "Pulse
> Punchy".... ;-)
> 
> Other things that seem to affect punchiness are the keyboard tracking
> of the filter (set this quite low) and the relationship of decay time
> and sustain level - normally my filter envelope would have a zero
> sustain but this just kills the sound too much because of the decay
> shape. Am I making sense? Anyway, the third envelope is the key to me
> - with the Evolver there's a way of doing "everything" - you just have
> to figure it out <g>
> 

Not yet having one in hand it's hard to make a meaningful suggestion but...

Did you try changing the envelope's decay shape by having it control its own
envelope times?  The old self-feedback trick to make an exponential decay
more linear (or even convex) or vice-versa?  It seems the mod matrix at
least offers control of overall envelope rates so even though separate
control over decay would be best maybe a bit of control feedback would help?

<you already know this trick I am sure but others may not>


drk

www.delora.com/music
www.mp3.com/zdrk
drk.iuma.com

> envelope times?  The old self-feedback trick to make an exponential 
decay
> more linear (or even convex) or vice-versa?  


Just to interject a note here - you can actually switch the envelopes 
between Exponential and Linear, but it's just one setting and it 
affects all 3 envelopes at once. I think Paul's suggestion was 
actually trying to make the curve go down quicker (i.e. away from 
being linear).

A few weeks ago I stumbled upon a trick that seemed to add a little 
punch to the attack - if I remember correctly it was a Square Wave 
LFO set to modulate the AMP Env Amount, but it would only work in 
sync with the sequencer I suppose, setting it to hit once per beat. 
It seemed like it was clipping off a small bit of the beginning of 
each note, so the volume jumped quickly with each hit of the square 
wave. Again, this wouldn't work for playing it from MIDI...unless 
there is an LFO Trigger parameter somewhere...I can't remember...

-jason

On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:21:19 -0000, "jpyn8 <jp1@...>"
<jp1@...> wrote:

>Just to interject a note here - you can actually switch the envelopes 
>between Exponential and Linear, but it's just one setting and it 
>affects all 3 envelopes at once. I think Paul's suggestion was 
>actually trying to make the curve go down quicker (i.e. away from 
>being linear).

I always use exponential but its shape seems not quite how I'm used to
from other such envelopes. Too steep, maybe. I've been meaning to
explore this some more even though the Evolver mostly serves (for me)
as a solo synth and weird noise maker/processor.

>A few weeks ago I stumbled upon a trick that seemed to add a little 
>punch to the attack - if I remember correctly it was a Square Wave 
>LFO set to modulate the AMP Env Amount, but it would only work in 
>sync with the sequencer I suppose, setting it to hit once per beat. 
>It seemed like it was clipping off a small bit of the beginning of 
>each note, so the volume jumped quickly with each hit of the square 
>wave. Again, this wouldn't work for playing it from MIDI...unless 
>there is an LFO Trigger parameter somewhere...I can't remember...

The sequencers have a short gate time that makes getting them to sound
punchy a little harder too. Again something I have not explored fully
enough. This synth can fill a lifetime of tinkering.... which is a
good thing <g>

Paul
---
Paul Nagle - SoftRoom Music - www.softroom.co.uk

Nah, I already measured, and the Pulse's attack speed is about 2x the 
evolver's. The shape of the envelope as a whole also affects punch, 
no question. I can also get some nice bass out of the evolver (with a 
lot of work), check out my 'basic bouncy bass' MP3 at evo's home. But 
it's just not something that comes natural to the evolver, and I 
think that's due to the evolver's attack speed as well as its 
envelope shapes. If we were given more choices for envelope shapes 
(better than a kludge involving the 3rd envelope, which is lame 
because then it can't be used for other purposes requiring a 
longer/shorter decay) as well as quicker attack times, the evo could 
thump with the best of them with a lot less effort. 

> My gut feeling is that is it the exponential decay shape, not the
> attack time that is preventing those really zappy basses. I have got
> very close to the sound I like (and could normally get easily) by
> using envelope 3 in conjunction with the filter envelope to add an
> extra "oomph" at the start of a filter blip. The two envelopes
> together make a pretty punchy sound although, I admit, not "Pulse
> Punchy".... ;-)
> 
> Other things that seem to affect punchiness are the keyboard 
tracking
> of the filter (set this quite low) and the relationship of decay 
time
> and sustain level - normally my filter envelope would have a zero
> sustain but this just kills the sound too much because of the decay
> shape. Am I making sense? Anyway, the third envelope is the key to 
me
> - with the Evolver there's a way of doing "everything" - you just 
have
> to figure it out <g>

On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 02:31:48 -0000, "thligrdd <onthesurface@...>"
<onthesurface@...> wrote:

>Nah, I already measured, and the Pulse's attack speed is about 2x the 
>evolver's. 

Fair enough, maybe a good idea to drop Dave an email about all this as
he may be bored with me going on about it <g>

Paul
---
Paul Nagle - SoftRoom Music - www.softroom.co.uk

> lol, the Dave phenomenon. He is so responsive that you start to 
feel guilty hitting him up! I wish more companies were like this!

Exactly! I think I'll just submit the attack suggestion to the 
database and let it be submitted to him when the time comes. The 
thing is, he's hinted that he doesn't plan on doing a euro-VA 
multiple-mega-feature-update thing, and you know he's busy as it is 
just keeping up, but it's so hard not to make suggestions when you 
think of a good idea, or when you have a question for him, etc. He's 
a better customer service department than most companies' customer 
service departments, and that's something that should be the least of 
his duties...amazing. 

Three cheers for Dave! Yee-haw! Yee-haw! Yee-haw! (anybody who's 
opened up their evo will understand).

Hi Paul,

can you advise me some good book with practical examples to learn the
subtractive synthesis.I´m a beginer. (maybe some online tutorial)

Thanks
--- In DSI_Evolver@yahoogroups.com, Paul Nagle <paul@s...> wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 09:17:02 -0000, "dragoh75 <dragoh75@v...>"
> <dragoh75@v...> wrote:
> 
> >Can you explain how you use envelope 3 in conjunction with the 
filter 
> >envelope ?
> 
> Sure, you just give it the same destination as the filter envelope
> (cutoff) and set up a slightly different shape. I would tend to 
create
> a more sloping filter envelope with a decay that is a little slower
> than normal and decaying to a non-zero sustain level. Balancing 
filter
> envelope amount, cutoff and keyfollow gets a nice feel. Then, to
> introduce extra "zap", create a much shorter envelope in envelope 3
> decaying quickly to zero and point this at cutoff too. The extra zap
> will make quite a difference, I find. Another good trick is to use 
one
> of the free modulation slots to have a small amount of resonance
> modulation controlled by an envelope too - this works best with the 
4

> pole filter as the 2 pole doesn't seem very responsive to resonance.
> 
> It would probably be easier still if envelope decay was a modulation
> destination.
> 
> Does that help?
> 
> Paul
> ---
> Paul Nagle - SoftRoom Music - www.softroom.co.uk

On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:36:07 -0000, "dragoh75 <dragoh75@...>"
<dragoh75@...> wrote:

>can you advise me some good book with practical examples to learn the
>subtractive synthesis.I\ufffdm a beginer. (maybe some online tutorial)

I don't really know - there's been some good stuff in the Sound On
Sound series "Synth Secrets" but it's got a little complex of late. I
think some of it will be available online (www.sospubs.co.uk).

Personally, I reckon the best way to learn is by getting a simple
monosynth - one "unfashionable" and therefore cheap. A Jen maybe but
something like an SH101 or SH09 would be good. Lots of controls, find
out what they all do. Then work up from there. 

Maybe somebody else can recommend a book - I don't really keep my eye
on that kind of thing. There is a nice tutorial free on the Access
website written by Howard Scarr that you could download.
www.access-music.de I think. A lot aimed at the Virus but good
generally anyway. 

Sorry, probably not much help,

Paul
---
Paul Nagle - SoftRoom Music - www.softroom.co.uk

--- In DSI_Evolver@yahoogroups.com, Paul Nagle <paul@s...> wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:36:07 -0000, "dragoh75 <dragoh75@v...>"
> <dragoh75@v...> wrote:
> 
> >can you advise me some good book with practical examples to learn 
the
> >subtractive synthesis.I´m a beginer. (maybe some online tutorial)


I typed in "subtractive synthesis" on Google and this one looks 
pretty good...there are tons of others, just do a search:

http://tyala.freeyellow.com/2ansynth.htm

I know this is a bit oblique, but I found the Nord Modular manual to 
have a very good description of how subtractive synthesis works, and 
unless I'm mistaken you can download it from the Clavia site 
www.clavia.se

(warning: may induce lust for Nord Modular!)

Alex

--- In DSI_Evolver@yahoogroups.com, "dragoh75 <dragoh75@v...>" 
<dragoh75@v...> wrote:
> Hi Paul,
> 
> can you advise me some good book with practical examples to learn 
the

> subtractive synthesis.I´m a beginer. (maybe some online tutorial)
> 
> Thanks

> Three cheers for Dave! Yee-haw! Yee-haw! Yee-haw! (anybody who's 
> opened up their evo will understand).


I just found that today :)
Should have known there'd be *something* in there.

It gave me an idea too, seeing how simple things were inside - it'd 
be really easy to design a custom wood case for this thing. Not that 
I would be able to stop playing it long enough to make one...

-jason

> 
> I just found that today :)
> Should have known there'd be *something* in there.

Why,

What's in there?

Cheers,
/R

--- In DSI_Evolver@yahoogroups.com, "Riccardo Coen <zinoff@y...>" 
<zinoff@y...> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > I just found that today :)
> > Should have known there'd be *something* in there.
> 
> Why,
> 
> What's in there?
> 
> Cheers,
> /R


Yee-Haw!

--- In DSI_Evolver@yahoogroups.com, "jpyn8 <jp1@c...>" <jp1@c...> 
wrote:
> > Three cheers for Dave! Yee-haw! Yee-haw! Yee-haw! (anybody who's 
> > opened up their evo will understand).
> 
> 
> I just found that today :)
> Should have known there'd be *something* in there.
> 
> It gave me an idea too, seeing how simple things were inside - it'd 
> be really easy to design a custom wood case for this thing. Not 
that 
> I would be able to stop playing it long enough to make one...
> 
> -jason

That's a great idea! I'm glad I thought of it ;). Hmm, it sounds like 
a project to me...custom evolver case.