If this was a module like the p12 module I would by it $500 less than this is and given the limited program slots in DSI synths I can see them being used up very quickly saving patterns. This is where Elektron machines are so much better with the ability to save each different element of a patch, And a lot of them.
great featured synth - awesome I/O, nice design & Dave Smith is a hero of mine. Lovely fella too.
Sadly I just can’t get with the DSI DCO sound - have sold both an Evolver & MEK in the past, so it won’t be for me, but a lovely synth I’m sure.
MNM MKIII + analog filters… we want escalation!
Just because my brain is not working at the moment and I can’t seem to come up with the answer, can you tell me what other synth has a 32 Step sequencer per track with 16 Tracks? That does sound pretty amazing to me, at least in terms of the current crop of synths go; I’m sure there was something in the past that was comparable, but I’m drawing a blank.
I’m liking this synth, though still waiting for my pre-ordered Moog Sub 37 to be released, but I’m more curious about the forthcoming Dave Smith Eurorack Modulars! You did all notice that in the video right?
[/quote]
I’m not sure what 16 tracks means? 16 different patterns or just 16 mod sequences like 1 for pitch and 1 for cutoff etc. The Elektron sequencers seem a lot more powerful as you can have many patterns of 64 steps with p locks , pattern chaining, Multimap program changes. I’ll to see what 16 tracks means and whether patterns can be saved independently to programs before I believe Mr Smith’s “most powerful step sequencer ever in a synth” claims.
Maybe Elektron could give use some digital waves in the Analog 4 to compete with DSI ? 
Might be possible because the noise generator is digital.
1 Like
Just because my brain is not working at the moment and I can’t seem to come up with the answer, can you tell me what other synth has a 32 Step sequencer per track with 16 Tracks? That does sound pretty amazing to me, at least in terms of the current crop of synths go; I’m sure there was something in the past that was comparable, but I’m drawing a blank.
I’m liking this synth, though still waiting for my pre-ordered Moog Sub 37 to be released, but I’m more curious about the forthcoming Dave Smith Eurorack Modulars! You did all notice that in the video right?
[/quote]
I’m not sure what 16 tracks means? 16 different patterns or just 16 mod sequences like 1 for pitch and 1 for cutoff etc. The Elektron sequencers seem a lot more powerful as you can have many patterns of 64 steps with p locks , pattern chaining, Multimap program changes. I’ll to see what 16 tracks means and whether patterns can be saved independently to programs before I believe Mr Smith’s “most powerful step sequencer ever in a synth” claims. [/quote]
My take - based on the Mopho’s 4x16 sequencer - is that each patch will have 16 tracks of 16 steps available (or 8 tracks of 32), with each one part of the mod matrix. So one pattern can control pitch (presumably either globally or per-osc), one cutoff, one wavetable position and so on and so on.
The pattern length is shorter than the Elektron sequencers, but having multiple sequences with variable lengths per patch is in many ways more powerful than the A4’s setup, for example - I can have pitch, cutoff and delay send, for example, all running with different lengths. On the A4, I have one track per synth and can only approximate this with LFOs or (presumably) neighbour tracks, all of which are a compromise.
I love the A4 and OT sequencers and I’ve not really used the Mopho’s that much, mainly because it’s a pain the neck on the desktop module. But I’m definitely interested in what the Pro-2’s sequencer can do - as I said above, a standalone version would be a no-brainer purchase.
1 Like
Elektron should first worry about being able to build and ship their existing product line before adding any more products, but I agree that would be pretty bad ass, especially if there was a keyboard version.
1 Like
No individual track lengths on the A4/AK?
The Pro 2 won’t be in stores for months, yet I’m already torn, lol.
Analog Keys should be able to sequence my Korg MS-20 Mini off the bat, since the CV outs can be set to S-Trig, Hz/V. But lack of polyrhythms is a bummer, though I could work around that by using the Octatrack sequencer and slaving the AK to that or something.
Pro 2 has the aforementioned polyrhythmic possibiliities, and the sequencer can send MIDI out! But the CV is only V/octave - no Hz/V mode. Then again, it’s got the dual filters that can be in series or parallel, with variable setting, and one of those filters is an SEM style design!
1 Like
With the A4 you have P locks and automation on each synth track but the ability to save many patterns and sounds where if I’m mistaken as I’m not familiar with Dave Smith Synths is they have 256 programs , So a patch contains a pattern that is 32 x 16 and if I had a song made up of say 8 patterns then that would be 8 programs out of 256 total. I would run out of those in a week and with the A4 I can save projects, Sounds , Kits and patterns. That’s where my concerns are but as I said I’m not familiar with Dave Smith synths and wondering if I can save multiple patterns within one patch.
[quote="“Mannity Joseph”"]
With the A4 you have P locks and automation on each synth track but the ability to save many patterns and sounds where if I’m mistaken as I’m not familiar with Dave Smith Synths is they have 256 programs , So a patch contains a pattern that is 32 x 16 and if I had a song made up of say 8 patterns then that would be 8 programs out of 256 total. I would run out of those in a week and with the A4 I can save projects, Sounds , Kits and patterns. That’s where my concerns are but as I said I’m not familiar with Dave Smith synths and wondering if I can save multiple patterns within one patch.[/quote]
This is totally different than the way Elektron does things (it’s the reason I’ve never ben able to get into Elektron stuff.)
If the Pro 2 is like any other traditional synth (like my old Ensoniq gear) then think of the Pro 2’s sequencer as a built in DAW. It’s completely separate from the sound program.
In other words, you pick a sound, say, a 4 oscillator sound in Paraphonic mode, then you can use the sequencer to do the following: 32 Steps in Track 1 to sequence Oscillator 1, and then 32 steps in Track 2 to sequence Oscillator 2, and the same for Track 3/Oscillator 3 and Track 4/Oscillator 4.
Then you can use Tracks 5-8 to sequence anything in the modulation section (what Elektron calls P-Locks) then Tracks 9 and 10 to sequence external MIDI gear through the 2 MIDI outs, then Tracks 11-14 to sequence a modular system through the 4 CV outs, Track 15 to sequence a drum machine out the CV Gate out… and you still have one track left over for whatever else you want! This is all mentioned in the video. Seems pretty powerful to me!
This is how I use to sequence my hardware back in the late 1980s early 1990s before I used a computer for music; had all 13 of my synths/samplers sequenced via MIDI either with my Akai MPC2000 or one of my Ensoniq synths (VFX SD or TS-10.) as the brains.
1 Like
I understand synths other than Elektron since I have owned a lot over 20 years but my issue isn’t with 16 tracks it’s with patterns and how many you can have which compared to Elektron is very limited. 1 pattern = 1 program= (i think) 256 programs total for the whole machine. I think also 128 of those are on board programs and not user ones. I may be mistaken here I understand since I haven’t seen anything that says in a program you can save 16 patterns or more etc but if it’s what it looks like in the video and in the specs you can only have 1 pattern per program.
[quote="“Mannity Joseph”"]
I understand synths other than Elektron since I have owned a lot over 20 years but my issue isn’t with 16 tracks it’s with patterns and how many you can have which compared to Elektron is very limited. 1 pattern = 1 program= (i think) 256 programs total for the whole machine. I think also 128 of those are on board programs and not user ones. I may be mistaken here I understand since I haven’t seen anything that says in a program you can save 16 patterns or more etc but if it’s what it looks like in the video and in the specs you can only have 1 pattern per program.[/quote]
Again, if it’s like traditional, non-Elektron synths, forget about saving a pattern with a program. It’s a separate thing. In the PRO 2 you have 396 USER programs and 396 FACTORY programs and those are just SOUNDS. The sequencer is a whole separate thing and will be saved as a sequence preset… I’m assuming, again, based on my historical experience. But, I could be wrong. We’ll have to wait and see when more details are revealed about those particulars.
But I do remember my Ensoniq VFX-SD (which I wish I still had) had a 24 Track sequencer and the sequences were NOT saved as part of the sound program, they were saved simply as sequences. It’s how most synth/sequencer keyboards worked in the past.
The only thing I do worry about is that you may not have 32 steps for each and every track. You may have to share the 32 steps between all 16 tracks; at least that’s what it looks like according to the specs - http://www.davesmithinstruments.com/products/pro2/specs.php
Yes I completely understand that and I use an Octatrack and Mpc5000 to sequence so to me a sequencer that is only 32 steps per program is useless to me since I would just use the others to sequence it and create tracks. To me that is very limited and Dave Smiths claim that it is the most advance sequencer ever in a synth is an over statement.
Impossible for two separate minds to think alike…
WISH LIST!
As a PRO Musician, Is it possible to get our best Gear Manufacturers to come together as a DREAM TEAM?, & make us the ultimate instrument?..
aannyywwaayy…
Disloyal?.. I’m look’n @ another Analog Synth!.. Hmmmm Worst!!!.. from the same Parent, Dave Smith :)) …
[quote="“Mannity Joseph”"]
Yes I completely understand that and I use an Octatrack and Mpc5000 to sequence so to me a sequencer that is only 32 steps per program is useless to me since I would just use the others to sequence it and create tracks. To me that is very limited and Dave Smiths claim that it is the most advance sequencer ever in a synth is an over statement.[/quote]
Ahh I see where you’re coming from. And yes, I agree, if you can only use 32 steps for the entirety of the sequence program, despite the amount of tracks, then that is pretty limited. But if it is 32 steps per track, using all 16 tracks (and those, essentially 512 steps, are saved as one sequence program) then Dave’s claims will be almost justified. Otherwise, it is only 2 steps per track if using all 16 tracks? That just doesn’t make sense… now I’m confused. 
Btw…
Using DSI whit a Mac is beautiful!!
Saving & Reloading entire User Banks is ah Breeze, literally under 20sec…
Jus Say’n
4 sequences are saved per patch on the evolver… would be surprised if the pro2’s 16 weren’t per patch as well.
That’s a good piece of information thank you:)
That’s an awesome synth I’m never going to buy.
I've learnt my lesson, and no matter how much I may or may not want this, or any other synth, i'll wait until its released and see what has been delivered on day one. As my old mum used to say, "a promise is comfort to a fool"
If all the promised features/functions are present and fully implemented/working, and if it sounds good to me then, and only then will I consider it.
This strategy I now apply to all synth producers. If you want me as a beta tester, you pay me, I'm not paying you.
If we all adopt this approach, then manufacturers would have to stop taking the piss out of us with incomplete products. I struggle to think of one synth in recent years that has been fully functioning from day one, as it was promised.
Rant over!!