Dave Smith Instruments SYNTHESIZERS

Loving my mono evolver, I've been lusting after the upcoming KB, and
thinking that maybe I could swing one with my summer bonus.

However the other day in a local music store, I noticed that they've
just dropped the prices of the Andromeda A6 dramatically[*], to the
point where it's competitive with the PE-KB (I guess this is the same
comparison that people in the more price-advantaged USA have already
been making... :-).

Anyway, I was playing with the A6, and it generally sounds very nice,
though not really the "perfect poly analogue".  Is there anybody on this
list that has both an A6 and a Polyevolver, and can offer some opinion
on how they compare after much use?

My initial impressions are:

  * A6 has nice filter resonance, seems a bit more useful for those
    filter-oriented sounds than the evolver's decent-but-plain filter.
    I liked the A6's filters a lot (though people seem to diss them
    constantly on various mailing lists...).

  * Pretty much every patch I listened to on the A6 had a kind of buzzy
    nasal character (not necessarily _bad_, but who knows it might be
    very annoying after a while).  The Evolver has that great
    big-clean-powerful digi-ana sound going down.

  * The "effects" (such as they are) on the Evolver are _much_ more
    interesting than the A6's plain-vanilla digital fx unit, but perhaps
    you can do some of the feedback etc. in the A6's analogue engine?

  * The evolver's sequencers are really nice, but the A6 seems to have
    some decent sequencing options too.

  * The A6 has acquired something of a bad reputation for being
    "flawed", e.g., with slow envelopes &c (which software updates
    apparently work around, but don't completely solve).

  * Obviously you get a lot more poly with the A6.

  * Visually, the Polyevolver KB is definitely better looking.

  * Same KB action :-)


-Miles

[*] This is in Japan, and they traditionally charge insane prices
    [before it was ~$4500 for the A6!] for megasynths like that, but the
    local Alesis distributor has recently changed to a smaller and much
    more competitive company.  Surprised the hell out of me, but ... yay!

-- 
If you can't beat them, arrange to have them beaten.  [George Carlin]

if you want filters then why not spend a lot less and
keep your evolver and buy a sherman filter bank ;)



--- Miles Bader <miles@...> wrote:

> Loving my mono evolver, I've been lusting after the
> upcoming KB, and
> thinking that maybe I could swing one with my summer
> bonus.
> 
> However the other day in a local music store, I
> noticed that they've
> just dropped the prices of the Andromeda A6
> dramatically[*], to the
> point where it's competitive with the PE-KB (I guess
> this is the same
> comparison that people in the more price-advantaged
> USA have already
> been making... :-).
> 
> Anyway, I was playing with the A6, and it generally
> sounds very nice,
> though not really the "perfect poly analogue".  Is
> there anybody on this
> list that has both an A6 and a Polyevolver, and can
> offer some opinion
> on how they compare after much use?
> 
> My initial impressions are:
> 
>   * A6 has nice filter resonance, seems a bit more
> useful for those
>     filter-oriented sounds than the evolver's
> decent-but-plain filter.
>     I liked the A6's filters a lot (though people
> seem to diss them
>     constantly on various mailing lists...).
> 
>   * Pretty much every patch I listened to on the A6
> had a kind of buzzy
>     nasal character (not necessarily _bad_, but who
> knows it might be
>     very annoying after a while).  The Evolver has
> that great
>     big-clean-powerful digi-ana sound going down.
> 
>   * The "effects" (such as they are) on the Evolver
> are _much_ more
>     interesting than the A6's plain-vanilla digital
> fx unit, but perhaps
>     you can do some of the feedback etc. in the A6's
> analogue engine?
> 
>   * The evolver's sequencers are really nice, but
> the A6 seems to have
>     some decent sequencing options too.
> 
>   * The A6 has acquired something of a bad
> reputation for being
>     "flawed", e.g., with slow envelopes &c (which
> software updates
>     apparently work around, but don't completely
> solve).
> 
>   * Obviously you get a lot more poly with the A6.
> 
>   * Visually, the Polyevolver KB is definitely
> better looking.
> 
>   * Same KB action :-)
> 
> 
> -Miles
> 
> [*] This is in Japan, and they traditionally charge
> insane prices
>     [before it was ~$4500 for the A6!] for
> megasynths like that, but the
>     local Alesis distributor has recently changed to
> a smaller and much
>     more competitive company.  Surprised the hell
> out of me, but ... yay!
> 
> -- 
> If you can't beat them, arrange to have them beaten.
>  [George Carlin]
> 



		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/

"Pretty much every patch I listened to on the A6 had a kind of buzzy 
nasal character (not necessarily _bad_, but who knows it might be  very 
annoying after a while). "


I don't want to get into an extended discussion of the A6 here because it is 
an evolver list. Just to say, it is a deep synth and many preconceptions 
arise from people not understanding how to use it properly.... not 
surprising as it takes weeks, months, years to figure it all out. 
Especially, do not judge the A6 from factory presets, the mixer levels on 
most of them are very wrong, leading it to sound overdriven, harsh and 
pinched. Partly becuase of its comprehensive pre and post filter mixing the 
A6 had a VAST range of possible colors and textural possibilties from both 
the VCOs and filters - more than any other analogue I've ever heard, it can 
emulate moog, roland, oberhiem characteristics pretty well and much more 
besides, it even does some things I've only heard from an FS1R or virus, it 
also emulates vintage string machines, EPs etc very very well. You can also 
control tuning in different ways and thus radically tailor the character of 
the synth. Hey, its an extraordinary synth with extraordinary routing and 
modulating possibilties... The filters are quite lovely and extremely 
flexible, and I've never heard anyone diss then anywhere actually! They can 
sound soft or hard, you can do pretty much what you want with them (not as 
flexible as VA obviously, but better sounding)... its unbelievably lush and 
articulate if you want it to be, hard and cutting if you want that..

as for the envelope question, they can be set very fast if u want them, so 
fast that there is an audible click when they come in (i.e. too fast) so 
there is no slow envelope issue with the current A6 software... again there 
is huge flexibilty here, far more than most synths offer, you can even 
adjust the envelope speeds separately for filters and pitch individually for 
each patch!

The A6 fx are generic (a design afterthought) and in no way creatively 
integrated into the signal flow  in an evolver/nord g2 kinda way... but it 
has decent enough (alesis wedge) verb, chorus etc which the evolver lacks. 
On paper the A6 sequencer is more flexible than the evolver in that more 
modulations are possible, but the evolver has some unique tricks (eg 
sequencer routing to fx modulation) and is considerably funner to use. For 
me this makes the Evo seq in fact more creative in practice.

BUT one thing the A6 cannot do is sound anything like an evolver! :) I think 
an a6 and a polyevolver would make a VERY good team for making almost every 
poly analogue sound under the sun

BTW I have an evolver and an A6, but not a polyevolver, my judgement is 
based on the fact that the polyevolver will sound pretty much the same as 
evolver. If I am wrong about that some of my judgements will not stand.

Richard

When pondering this question a thought came across my mind, I have a
PolyEvolver and I had an A6 for a short while (about a month) It seems I had
to "tune" the A6 constantly but have never had to tune my Poly. I was just
curious what Dave is doing to keep the Poly always in tune. Any Ideas?


Don

"Don Gothard" <gothard@...> writes:
> When pondering this question a thought came across my mind, I have a
> PolyEvolver and I had an A6 for a short while (about a month) It seems I had
> to "tune" the A6 constantly but have never had to tune my Poly. I was just
> curious what Dave is doing to keep the Poly always in tune. Any Ideas?

From what I've read, the evolver essentially uses DCOs, not VCOs like
the A6.

[I say "essentially" because they apparently have higher tuning
precision than olde-style DCOs, which the Evolver uses to implement
stuff like the "osc slop"]

-Miles
-- 
((lambda (x) (list x x)) (lambda (x) (list x x)))

I always thought it had 2 VCO's and 2 DCO's. I have no idea what DSI
has done to keep it all in tune so well, but I am certain the 2
"analogue" oscillators are in fact VCO's. They certainly sound warmer
than my G2's oscillators.

Afro88

--- In DSI_Evolver@yahoogroups.com, Miles Bader <miles@g...> wrote:
> "Don Gothard" <gothard@s...> writes:
> > When pondering this question a thought came across my mind, I have a
> > PolyEvolver and I had an A6 for a short while (about a month) It
seems I had
> > to "tune" the A6 constantly but have never had to tune my Poly. I
was just

> > curious what Dave is doing to keep the Poly always in tune. Any Ideas?
> 
> From what I've read, the evolver essentially uses DCOs, not VCOs like
> the A6.
> 
> [I say "essentially" because they apparently have higher tuning
> precision than olde-style DCOs, which the Evolver uses to implement
> stuff like the "osc slop"]
> 
> -Miles
> -- 
> ((lambda (x) (list x x)) (lambda (x) (list x x)))

On 27/3/05 7:12 PM, "afro_88" <afro88@...> wrote:

> 
> I always thought it had 2 VCO's and 2 DCO's. I have no idea what DSI
> has done to keep it all in tune so well, but I am certain the 2
> "analogue" oscillators are in fact VCO's. They certainly sound warmer
> than my G2's oscillators.
> 
> Afro88
> 
yup - 2 of each.

}:-)


email :
  moose@...

music sites :
  http://www.pigpendigital.com
  http://www.alaskahighway.com
  http://www.mishikawa.com

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 03:12:08 -0000, afro_88 <afro88@...> wrote:
> I always thought it had 2 VCO's and 2 DCO's

Well the 2 digital/wavetable oscs are neither DCOs or VCOs, as those terms
are usually used.  [My definition of the term DCO is "an analogue
wave-shaper running off a digital clock".]

As I recall, the analogue chips in the Evolver were originally designed for
the Marion synth line, and the oscillators were termed "HRO"s -- "High
Resolution Oscillators"; everything I've seen on these has been a bit vague
about what the actually underlying implementation is.  Even DSI's FAQ
dodges the issue by using the term "analogue oscillator waveshapes" rather
than "analogue oscillators" in the answer to the "Is the Evolver analogue
or digital?" question.

Anybody put their Evolver chips under a microscope? :-)

> I have no idea what DSI has done to keep it all in tune so well, but I
> am certain the 2 "analogue" oscillators are in fact VCO's. They
> certainly sound warmer than my G2's oscillators.

DCOs are allowed to sound warm too... :-)

-Miles
-- 
In New York, most people don't have cars, so if you want to kill a person, you
have to take the subway to their house.  And sometimes on the way, the train
is delayed and you get impatient, so you have to kill someone on the subway.
  [George Carlin]

If you want to hear music made with the A6 and the Evo(mono) 
together visit Bolele Gerkes site at  http://synthmusic.info/

The A6 certainly seems capable of some excellent pads...the Evo 
shines in his compositions as well.  These two synths compliment 
each other well!    





--- In DSI_Evolver@yahoogroups.com, Miles Bader <miles@g...> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 03:12:08 -0000, afro_88 <afro88@m...> wrote:
> > I always thought it had 2 VCO's and 2 DCO's
> 
> Well the 2 digital/wavetable oscs are neither DCOs or VCOs, as 
those terms
> are usually used.  [My definition of the term DCO is "an analogue
> wave-shaper running off a digital clock".]
> 
> As I recall, the analogue chips in the Evolver were originally 
designed for
> the Marion synth line, and the oscillators were termed "HRO"s --
 "High
> Resolution Oscillators"; everything I've seen on these has been a 
bit vague
> about what the actually underlying implementation is.  Even DSI's 
FAQ
> dodges the issue by using the term "analogue oscillator 
waveshapes" rather
> than "analogue oscillators" in the answer to the "Is the Evolver 
analogue
> or digital?" question.
> 
> Anybody put their Evolver chips under a microscope? :-)
> 
> > I have no idea what DSI has done to keep it all in tune so well, 
but I
> > am certain the 2 "analogue" oscillators are in fact VCO's. They
> > certainly sound warmer than my G2's oscillators.
> 
> DCOs are allowed to sound warm too... :-)
> 
> -Miles
> -- 
> In New York, most people don't have cars, so if you want to kill a 
person, you
> have to take the subway to their house.  And sometimes on the way, 
the train
> is delayed and you get impatient, so you have to kill someone on 
the subway.
>   [George Carlin]

"Richard Scott" <richardscott@...> writes:
> "Pretty much every patch I listened to on the A6 had a kind of buzzy 
> nasal character (not necessarily _bad_, but who knows it might be  very 
> annoying after a while). "
...
> Especially, do not judge the A6 from factory presets, the mixer levels on 
> most of them are very wrong, leading it to sound overdriven, harsh and 
> pinched.

Can you recommend simple tweaking methods that would allow me to try
removing this effect while I'm listening in the store?

E.g.: reduce pre-mix levels to 25%, increase final gain to compensate...
That sort of thing.

Thanks,

-Miles
-- 
I'm beginning to think that life is just one long Yoko Ono album; no rhyme
or reason, just a lot of incoherent shrieks and then it's over.  --Ian Wolff

Thanks for the advice, I'll give it a shot!

"Richard Scott" <richardscott@...> writes:
> The other tip, unless you want absolute VA-like tuning accuracy, is to
> turn background tuning OFF and temp tuning ON - these gives a more
> vintage analogue quality

Hmmm, I hear you there... I think the most lovely sounding synth I ever
got a chance to play was a grievously out-of-tune Prophet 5 -- when I
did something to make it go back into tune (maybe I hit the tune
button?) it lost some of the magic... :-)

For some reason I've never been able to duplicate that kind of magic
feeling by using intentional detuning; I'm not sure what's up with
that...

-Miles
-- 
[|nurgle|]  ddt- demonic? so quake will have an evil kinda setting? one that
            will  make every christian in the world foamm at the mouth?
[iddt]      nurg, that's the goal

--- In DSI_Evolver@yahoogroups.com, Miles Bader <miles@g...> wrote:
> Anyway, I was playing with the A6, and it generally sounds very nice,
> though not really the "perfect poly analogue".  Is there anybody on this
> list that has both an A6 and a Polyevolver, and can offer some opinion
> on how they compare after much use?

Richard summed it up really well, in comparing the A6 to the Evolver/Polyevolver. 

I've owned the A6 for a little over a year, and just received an mono Evolver about two 
weeks ago.  Hearing these two synthesizers play together, it really blew my mind as to 
how well they seem to fit together.  Richard nailed it on the head when he discussed the 
rather poor-quality patches in the default A6 banks.  

One thing you should do if you own (or hope to own) an A6, is to purchase a 2MB SRAM 
PCMCIA card to expand the banks to 9 total (from 3 originally.)  Then download the 
patches from Alesis's web site.  The patches from Klaus Peter Rausch, Rob Papen, and 
Brian Kehew are particularly good.  (In fact, there's one patch, can't remember the bank it's 
in, but it absolutely rips your head off, it's a great lead sound, very powerful... It proved to 
me the A6 has cajones, if the patch is designed correctly.)

Anyhow, like it's been said before, do *not* base your opinion of the A6 on the default 
patches.  But *do* try to play an A6 next to an Evolver/Polyevolver if you get the chance.  
They sonically work really well together, sorta like peanut butter & jelly. :)

Best regards-
Eric

On 16/4/05 10:30 AM, "ericj2525" wrote:


> Anyhow, like it's been said before, do *not* base your opinion of the A6 on
> the default 
> patches.  But *do* try to play an A6 next to an Evolver/Polyevolver if you get
> the chance.  
> They sonically work really well together, sorta like peanut butter & jelly. :)

i totally agree.  i have the poly evolver keyboard here for a short while
and it sounds & interfaces really well (DSi have done a great job with the
interface) but there are still things i prefer on the A6.  in a similar way
i have both the NL2 & NL3 and wouldn't want to choose just one...

right, back to making PEK patches!

};-)


email :
  moose@...

music sites :
  http://www.pigpendigital.com
  http://www.alaskahighway.com
  http://www.mishikawa.com

moose <moose@...> writes:
>> Anyhow, like it's been said before, do *not* base your opinion of the
>> A6 on the default patches.  But *do* try to play an A6 next to an
>> Evolver/Polyevolver if you get the chance.  They sonically work
>> really well together, sorta like peanut butter & jelly. :)
>
> i totally agree.  i have the poly evolver keyboard here for a short while
> and it sounds & interfaces really well (DSi have done a great job with the
> interface) but there are still things i prefer on the A6.  in a similar way

Any more specific observations?

I spent a few hours in a shop trying to get a more detailed impression
of the A6, using a list of tweaks Richard sent me to try an remove the
typical "A6 [preset] sound".

So I was turning down mixer levels very low, etc. trying to avoid
clipping, turned off tuning, etc.

The end result was sort of inconclusive; if anything I'm now a bit less
impressed by the A6 than I was initially.  The tweaks seemed to make
_some_ difference, but not all that much [and the UI on the A6 is quite
daunting, so I often got completey lost trying to effect some simple
change (like "hmm, sounds there's some FM or fast LFO mod going on, I'll
try to remove it..." only to give up 20 minutes later having turned down
every mod and tweak I could find, without finding what I wanted).]

The A6 certainly is very strong in the bass dept (not just "strength",
it simply sounds realllly nice), has a very sweet sounding square wave
at high pitches, the FM is great (it seemed very organic and
non-DX-sounding, I've never had a synth with FM that sounded like
that...), and overall definitely has this appealing "yeah, VCOs!" sound
to it.  On the other hand, I could not seem to make it sound sweet or
warm in the midrange, and never really did hear anything that would make
me think "Rich and wide polysynth"; even my poor little mono Evolver
seems to have it beat handily on that score (which is one thing that
makes the Polyevolver keyboard sound so tempting).

Another point that drove me nuts about the A6 was that the aftertouch
seemed nigh-well unusable -- it was either way too insensitive or way
too sensitive, and I couldn't manage to adjust it to some useful middle
value; also in the "more sensitive" settings, it was very hard to avoid
pegging the aftertouch due to the initial keystrike.  [As the A6 and
polyevolver keyboard use the same action, this has me bit concerned
about the PEK too; people have reported Dave has paid particular
attention to getting good aftertouch response, so I donno...]

Anyway, while I believe what people say about the _possibility_ of
getting these sounds out of the A6, I'm beginning to think that it's out
of reach of mere mortals ... :-/

I've still got lots of time before I get any money to spend though, so
I'm definitely gonna give the A6 a few more tries to see if something
clicks.

[Oh, BTW, I was using AKG 240M headphones for this (driven by a mixer),
which do have a tendency to be a bit unflattering, but at least provide
some consistency in listening environment; I also use the same
headphones with the Evolver.]

Thanks,

-Miles
-- 
Ich bin ein Virus. Mach' mit und kopiere mich in Deine .signature.

--- In DSI_Evolver@yahoogroups.com, Miles Bader <miles@g...> 
wrote:
> moose <moose@p...> writes:
> >> Anyhow, like it's been said before, do *not* base your 
opinion of the
> >> A6 on the default patches.  But *do* try to play an A6 next to 
an
> >> Evolver/Polyevolver if you get the chance.  They sonically 
work
> >> really well together, sorta like peanut butter & jelly. :)
> >


I'm just curious if anyone has compared an A6 with the Waldorf 
Q+? Would that also be a good companion for the PEK?

On 18/4/05 5:03 AM, "dhamaryder" wrote:


> I'm just curious if anyone has compared an A6 with the Waldorf
> Q+? Would that also be a good companion for the PEK?

well, a6 (analogue) vs Q (va) vs pek (analogue/digital).  way different
sound sets...

i currently have access to all 3 and each have their own character - the pek
is more like an analogue wavestation (obviously) whereas the Q can be rudely
digital and aggressive.  the a6 is wonderfully analogue in several
departments...

}:-|


email :
  moose@...

music sites :
  http://www.pigpendigital.com
  http://www.alaskahighway.com
  http://www.mishikawa.com