Dave Smith Instruments SYNTHESIZERS

> would an an editor NOT > make much difference in ease of programming?

Not sure about that.
With an editor you still ahve all parameters on one screen, ALL oscillators, 
ALL sequencer rows, ALL LFOs and so on.
But you still have access only to one parameter at a time, you need to 
locate it with the mouse pointer, then carefully adjust it, then you will 
THINK about the next parameter that could be adjusted.

On the PEK user interface you don't have all parameters at hand for direct 
access, but you have FAST access to the most important parameters, you can 
turn 2 or more knobs at a time, you can play with one hand and twiddle knobs 
with the other and you FEEL the instrument during the whole process.

I've formed the habit to edit the PEK via its UI and the PER via soft 
editor. Usually I end up with very different kinds of sounds from both 
approaches.
I'd call one of them the analytical, the other one the intuitive kind of 
programming.

Regards

Stefan

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "dhamaryder" <dhamaryder@...>
To: <DSI_Evolver@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 4:09 PM
Subject: [Evolver] question about PEK


> I'm thinking of saving up for a PEK(which should take me about 8
> months to a year!) but I have a question. In the pictures I've seen
> I'm really impressed with the way it's laid out. it almost seems
> like an editor would be useless. I use a mono evolver and an
> editor helps greatly, I don't enjoy programming without it actually.
> But with the PEK it looks like it would be almost more bother to
> hook up an editor when everything is already so clearly laid out in
> front of you.  Is my interpretation correct? would an an editor NOT
> make much difference in ease of programming?
>
> steve
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>