Any DSI Evolver love?

[circuitghost]

Yep, makes sense. And yet, not.

If you’re going into Elektron’s world, you can get sampler, synth and drummer if you get a bunch of machines. But if you want a synth like the Evolver today, you can’t mix and match Sequential products to get there. It’s more like you have to decide what’s most relevant for you and stick with that board.

Crazy shit sound design? Prophet 12. Vintage cream? Prophet 6? Still vintage, but more out there? OB-6. Classy sound but tons of features? Rev2? And so on.

If I’d go for a Prophet today, I’d go for the Prophet 12. It’s the strangest of them and as such, the one I’d like the most. But I certainly don’t lust for one right now, with all this blue-painted awesome I got on my desk.

[PeterHanes]

Yeah I remember reading comments years ago that when they developed the Evolver DSI were trying to build the ultimate CEM based synth. As it was their first instrument they tried to cover all bases. However once they realised there was a market for stuff like the Prophet 08 they realised they could offer a range of synths rather that just one flagship product. So essentially they ‘split’ the essence of the Evolver across several instruments in what’s really a marketing move.

Do you have evidence to support any of those statements? Actual quotes or references?

[Bunker]

Short of wading through forum posts from years ago, no. They were comments that were doing the rounds back then. Just comments on forums like this one.

[PeterHanes]

They were comments that were doing the rounds back then. Just comments on forums like this one.

Were they comments from Dave Smith or other DSI staff?

[Bunker]

Nope, don’t think I saw them personally saying that. Just what others were saying at the time.

I’m sure I read some online articles expressing a similar point of view but it was donkeys years ago. I’ve slept since then. Either way I love my Evolvers and I like DSI as a company. If they did an Evolver 2.0 with fully implemented wave sequencing and a few other bells and whistles I’d have one for sure.

[PeterHanes]

I love my Evolvers and I like DSI as a company

Me, too! (Evolver and PolyEvolver here).

Nope, don’t think I saw them personally saying that. Just what others were saying at the time.

So how much credence do you give to those outsiders‘ statements?

[Bunker]

I just try and form an opinion based on different sources. I don’t think Dave Smith would come out and say that was the case and I don’t blame him. Not great for business to say we gave you too much, now we’ll take some away. I just recall that there was a point of view that that’s what had happened. Some people were saying it was a victim of its own success as it spawned their later instruments. I don’t know, I guess only mr Smith and his cadre know for sure? Ps PEK PE and MEK PE (converted and knobs upgraded) here. I still wake up in cold sweats thinking about the PE rack I missed out on on eBay years ago

In fact I was that on the Evolver bus at the time that I bought the potentiometer upgrade kit well before I got my first Evolver, the MEK! Plus I do all my own repairs etc but when I damaged a pot shaft on my PEK I sent the board to DSI to repair. Happy to support them even in a small way and I can’t praise Carson and the guys more for their customer service over the years.

[circuitghost]

I know I will regret asking. But since not one, but two, Poly Evolver owners are hanging out in this thread now, just tell me -

Is it even more awesome? I’m not gunning for one, don’t think I could afford it and certainly don’t lust for new when I’ve just received what I got, but I have been as curious on the Poly as I have on the Mono.

[PeterHanes]

Is it even more awesome?

This is of course subjective. I’m not a big fan of polysynths, so take the following with a pinch of salt.

The PolyEvolvers are not just four-voice Evolvers, but four whole Evolvers in a box. Therefore each voice has the stereo audio processing capability (as well as the four oscillators, feedback etc) of a single Evolver, so the PEs are rather different in capability from a standard polysynth. To my mind, it makes the PE most efficient as set of four monosynths or audio processors. (It’s interesting to look at the Analog Four’s design in the context of the DSI synths.)

That said, I often use my E+PE as a polysynth with the desktop unit acting as a programmer for the rackmount.

The MEK is the only Evolver that includes an arpeggiator as well as the sequencer, and in my mind it’s the best-realized form of the Evolver.

[killingtime]

My PER would be almost impossible to use without my MEK or a dedicated editor for the computer but when it is hooked up to the MEK having 5 evolver voices under your control is pretty powerful, really good for massive sounding pads and soundscapes. The tuned feedback is inspiring to work with, you can get some almost physically modelled acoustic plucks and hits. Pairing the PER with the MEK isn’t perfect, the outputted voice on the MEK is much louder than the combined output of the PER voices so I have to attenuate it through a mixer. My MEK was one of the original Encoder ones and I did the Pot. upgrade, wasn’t an expert at soldering but sweated it out and it works fine!

[Bunker]

Can only echo what Peter has said. My MEK gets used more that my PEK. I guess I see the PEK as overkill on some tracks; the MEK acts as a counterpoint to some of my warmer sounding synths so I tend to have an idea of what I want from the part and I just jump into the MEK and build the patch. These parts are generally sequences so I just default to the MEK when it’s only a mono line that’s required. I’ve got other poly’s that do warm and silky but (to my ears) more angular is always lurking within the PEK if needed. Given my time again It wouldn’t be my first choice as a main poly (it was at the time I got it) but it’s nice to have on hand.

[Bunker]

Didn’t someone do a third party e book/manual for the Evolvers? Or am I getting confused with something else?

Edit - It’s already been posted🙈

[circuitghost]

Thank you all. Won’t be going for a Poly Evolver now or ever, or so my gut tells me. Same gut tells me the Mono is here to stay.

[chiasticon]

I know I will regret asking. But since not one, but two, Poly Evolver owners are hanging out in this thread now, just tell me -

Is it even more awesome?

this reminded me of the beloved Jexus pondering the Poly Evolver… which included this quote: “if the Poly Evolver had 8 or more voices it would be a mass f*cking murder machine…”

http://syntezatory.net.pl/dsi_mono_evolver.htm

[dtr]

I got curious about the mentions of encoder issues here and there. I went looking and found this statement by Dave Smith, which I thought might interest some here:

A Note from Dave Concerning Encoder Issues - Sequential

[circuitghost]

Yeah, maybe my mind just can’t take multiple Evolver voices. I am too fragile for anything but a mono voice in this concept. Would I ever play the Poly, I would go as mad as anyone from a Lovecraft story.

[circuitghost]

Another day with the Evolver, loving the sequencer now.

It’s odd, I had a Rev2 a brief while but sold it because for some reason, it didn’t talk to me. But looking at what I like about the Evolver, I can find almost all of its features on the Rev2 and then some. I’m wondering why it didn’t appeal to me as much.

I’m thinking two things - the stereo thing in the Evolver. It’s not just pan spread. It’s all over the place. Filters, delay and stuff. Rev2 can’t do that. It really makes just a single patch sound almost finished for mastering, if you treat it right.

And the oscillators. There’s some dreamy cream quality to the sounds, and I reckon that starts with the combo of analogues and digitals.

In fact, the Tempest is the closest DSI / Sequential gear I can come up with, that just sounds kind of like an Evolver (and yet not, it’s not as smooth as the blue one).

Also, the Rev2 just sounded too good, if you can believe such a thing - so clean, it might as well have been a great VST or processed in a DeadmauS studio or something. The Evolver has that quality to it, the synth equivalent of a vinyl record.

[groovytechno]

Original owner of a PEK since '09, and I can’t tell you all how many times I’ve re-fallen in love with it over the years. Truly a unique beast that keeps on giving.

There was one time I considered selling it to fund some other gear I was lusting over, but just as I was about to close the deal, I just couldn’t go through with it. The would-be buyer was completely understanding, thankfully.

I remember after my conversation with him, I sauntered towards my beloved Poly. As I approached it, I leaned in and gave it a gentle smooch somewhere between the LCD display and the Program button, while caressing it’s brilliant Bubinga wood sides; I stated apologetic words of remorse for what I was about to do.

Sadly, in recent weeks, switching the power button ON is causing the entire beast to glitch out, almost as if the power adapter is not able to provide enough juice to it. Some lights turn on, but freeze and the LCD display stays dim and frozen, usually with a nasty wave cycle sound that pops my monitors in the most horrific of ways. I’ve got a new wall wart being made to spec, which should be ready for me within a couple of days. I hope that will solve my problem, otherwise I fear I will have to part with it while I send it in for repair… Fingers crossed.

[circuitghost]

This has got to be one of the first introduction posts a new member in a community has ever delivered. Welcome to the Elektronauts love and thank you for that story. With a cliffhanger, too! I’m hoping for a happy ending.

[bwo]

I think DSI/sequential still does repairs on all of the line of synths they made under the DSI brand, starting with the evolver if I’m not wrong. I mentioned once the thought of buying a second Pro2 as a back up given how cheap they had gotten and the rep from DSI seemed to say they supported repairs on all DSI gear and will continue to.