i have a question which may sound not all that informed. It´s always stated that the Filter on a Synth is the part that determines the sound the most.
The Curtis Filter on the DSI Rev2 is a pretty polarising Filter. Some like it, some hate it.
So can you put a Filter at the End of the Signal Chain? What would happen, if you don´t use the Curtis Filter on the Rev2 and instead send the Output of the Synth trough a SEM Filter Modul. Would that be possible and would it makes sense to say that the Rev2 would then be able to Sound more like an OB6 (Yeah i know it has VCOs instead of DCO´s)
It might be best taking the rev 2 for what it is rather than try to bypass features , I think it sounds great. I think the comments about the Curtis filter are just a lot of parroting and people repeating something enough times til it sticks. I’ve owned both rev and ob6 and they both sound great as well as different.
If the rev 2 is not the sound you like perhaps you could look at an Ob6 desktop module for a little bit more than a rev 2 16 voice. The rev 2 has so many modulations options and features for sound design it’s hard to make it sound bad.
That doesn’t really answer the question though
There’s loads of Rev 2 (all the leads and strings) in this song and it sounds every bit as nice and bright as an OB6
I mean, that’s the difference between a polyphonic and a paraphonic synth. If you just strap a filter to the outputs you lose any kind of per-voice filter envelope settings so you’re limited to far fewer types of patches.
+1 on this. I have the P08, and it’s just wonderful. I believe the strong opinions harken back from when it was released. It was the first analog poly from a major name to come out in so many years, and it was destined to upset the people who had collected all this vintage gear that up until then was uncontested in the analog realm.
If you can’t get the P08 or Rev2 to sound fat, full and warm, you need to re-read the Synth Secrets series by Sound On Sound or something
If you would have a global filter it would affect the whole sound, just try playing a chord one note at a time slowly, with a filter sweep via envelope, you will hear that each note gets its own sweep. This will not happen if you have a filter on the line outs. This method would be a bit more viable on a mono synth, but still a bit complicated to get musical sounds out of! IMO ofc.
On a polyphonic instrument each voice has it’s own filter. If we use keytracking, which is supposed to control the cut-off, each filter will be influenced by the pitch. If we play a chord, each note of the cord will have it’s specific sound.
If we put the complete sound through one single filter, all notes of the chord are treated the same and the result is less differentiated and would definitely sound different.
Curtis and SEM filters sound quite different.
On the Prophet 08 we have Curtis filter as low pass and two options, which are 24 dB/Oct and 12 dB/Oct. The resonance in 24 dB/Oct is distinct, but it’s very subtle on the 12 dB/Oct (at least on my synth).
A typical SEM filter is a state-variant multimode filter in 12 dB/Oct. It has LP, HP, BP, and Notch. The resonance on the first three is distinct. The sound is more crisp or full, because it allows more harmonics to pass through.
Expect more punchy and defined sounds from a 24dB/Oct and more creamy sounds from 12dB/Oct.
24 dB/Oct is excellent at achieving punchy and well defined basses and leads, but to me it’s not as strong at creating soft pads.
12 dB/Oct is particularly good for soft and creamy pads. It creates excellent basses and leads too.
Moog and Roland VCOs and VCFs tend more to be string-like, DSI and Oberheim tend more to be on the brassy side.
So if you want a real SEM sound, go Oberheim SEM, DSI OB-6 (SEM included), or Analogue Solutions Telemark, Nyborg 12 (both not SEM clones, but definitely great sounding instruments, inspired by original SEM circuit designs)
