Quantcast
Blofeld vs Prophet VS? - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Blofeld vs Prophet VS?
Old 22nd January 2009
  #1
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Blofeld vs Prophet VS?

Both use wavetables....which one is better? VS is more expensive -- is it much lusher than the blofeld even though it has appears it has less features? I believe it has analog stages...
Old 22nd January 2009
  #2
Lives for gear
 
OurDarkness's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
VS all the way.
1
Share
Old 22nd January 2009
  #3
Lives for gear
 
LNerell's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by aquablu8 ➡️
Both use wavetables....which one is better? VS is more expensive -- is it much lusher than the blofeld even though it has appears it has less features? I believe it has analog stages...
It has analog stages as you say, but the digital side is much older then the Blofeld so it has more artifacts in the sounds. Comparing the two to me is very difficult, almost pointless seeing as they are from different lineage. If you want to make a fairer comparision then try a Blofeld to a PPG Wave 2.3, or the VS to a Korg Wavestation. One thing the blofeld has over the VS is it can be purchased new now, and can be repaired quite easily.
Old 22nd January 2009 | Show parent
  #4
Lives for gear
 
Phaidon's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
I just can't stand the converters in the VS(and the aliasing,which is part of the VS character).
Otherwise a superb synth...
Old 22nd January 2009 | Show parent
  #5
Lives for gear
 
waveterm's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
The VS doesn´t use Wavetables.

WT
Old 22nd January 2009 | Show parent
  #6
Gear Addict
 
sheever's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Prophet VS
Old 22nd January 2009 | Show parent
  #7
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by LNerell ➡️
Comparing the two to me is very difficult, almost pointless seeing as they are from different lineage.
I agree.
The ultimate answer to me is that if anything goes wrong with the VS you might not be able to fix it, or the fix might be very expensive.
Great synth though.
Old 22nd January 2009 | Show parent
  #8
Lives for gear
 
cosmos's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Thats an unusual question.

if a Prophet VS is in your way for a Blofeld price, get it. you will understand later.
Old 22nd January 2009 | Show parent
  #9
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by waveterm ➡️
The VS doesn´t use Wavetables.

WT
Are you sure about that?
Old 22nd January 2009 | Show parent
  #10
Lives for gear
 
waveterm's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by triez ➡️
Are you sure about that?
Yes.

WT
Old 23rd January 2009
  #11
Gear Nut
 
🎧 15 years
For me it is like comparing a vintage Mustang with an actual M3 BMW.
The VS may not decrease in value. The Blofeld will.
You will get more different type of sounds with the Blofeld. I would say more modern or even spectacular.
But the VS does sound really unique. If you like it, you will be very happy. Keep in mind that some of the VS parts are hard to find if something goes down. I have heard of problems with X/Y Joystick and Keyboard issues.

But hey - come on - the blofeld goes for nothing... be a slut and get both
1
Share
Old 23rd January 2009 | Show parent
  #12
Deleted 8456dd3
Guest
The VS is a killer synth. Still one of my favourites. Has a wonderful sound that new stuff doesnt come close to.. for sure id choose the VS everytime.
Old 25th January 2009 | Show parent
  #13
Gear Addict
 
sheever's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
get the DSI evolver rack.
there is 2 fm oscillator by Prphet VS.
384 waveforms and you can create new ones with editor.
Old 25th January 2009 | Show parent
  #14
Lives for gear
 
shadowfac's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by waveterm ➡️
The VS doesn´t use Wavetables.

WT
According to the specs, the Prophet VS has 96 preset waveforms plus 32 user waveforms. That pretty much sounds like they're wavetable based. Maybe not dynamic wavetables as in the Waldorfs, where you can smoothly interpolate between different waveforms, but they're wavetables alright.

(technically, a wavetable is a single-cycle digital representation of a periodic waveform)
Old 25th January 2009 | Show parent
  #15
Lives for gear
 
waveterm's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Well then, by your logic then all synths containing waveforms , analog or digital, have wavetables.

Or ?

I still claim that the VS doesn´t use wavetables.

WT
Old 25th January 2009 | Show parent
  #16
Gear Addict
 
sheever's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by waveterm ➡️
Well then, by your logic then all synths containing waveforms , analog or digital, have wavetables.

Or ?

I still claim that the VS doesn´t use wavetables.

WT
forexample Korg DW8000 have 16 digital waveforms to create a voice and use it analogue filters.
Old 25th January 2009 | Show parent
  #17
Lives for gear
 
shadowfac's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by waveterm ➡️
Well then, by your logic then all synths containing waveforms , analog or digital, have wavetables.
No, that is not what I said. First, analog waveforms do not count as wavetables since they're not stored in tables. They're not stored at all.

Digital (sampled) waveforms can be stored in tables, or can be realtime-generated (e.g., physical modeling). In the former case, the table used to store the waveform is called wavetable. More generally, a wavetable can store multiple waveforms. Therefore, 99% of sample-based synths use wavetables. However, the term "wavetable" is usually restricted for those samples which represent a single cycle of a periodic waveform. For example, a set of piano multisamples would not be considered a wavetable by this definition. On the other hand, I could even argue that the Yamaha DX-7 is wavetable-based, since the sine wave it uses for its operators is stored in a wavetable.

Some particular synths, such as the PPG Wave, Walford Wave/Microwave range, and Korg Wavestation, are capable of switching or even interpolating between wavetables while a note is playing. PPG introduced the term wavetable in this context, and this is the reason many people think that wavetable-based synths are only limited to this particular way of wavetable scanning/switching/interpolation. This has only generated confusion about what a wavetable synth is or isn't.

So, neither you or me are wrong. It's just that you're following the PPG definition of "wavetable", whereas I adhere to the technical definition.

Then again, even by the PPG definition, I would argue that the VS is a wavetable based synth. For example, the Waldorf Microwave series (typical wavetable synthesizers) are capable of interpolating between two adjacent waveforms stored in a 64-waveform table. In the case of the VS, one can interpolate between 4 fixed waveforms. So it is possible to switch or interpolate between different waveforms in a table.
3
Share
Old 25th January 2009 | Show parent
  #18
Lives for gear
 
waveterm's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowfac ➡️
No, that is not what I said. First, analog waveforms do not count as wavetables since they're not stored in tables. They're not stored at all.
True. I was just messing with you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowfac ➡️
Digital (sampled) waveforms can be stored in tables, or can be realtime-generated (e.g., physical modeling). In the former case, the table used to store the waveform is called wavetable. More generally, a wavetable can store multiple waveforms. Therefore, 99% of sample-based synths use wavetables. However, the term "wavetable" is usually restricted for those samples which represent a single cycle of a periodic waveform. For example, a set of piano multisamples would not be considered a wavetable by this definition. On the other hand, I could even argue that the Yamaha DX-7 is wavetable-based, since the sine wave it uses for its operators is stored in a wavetable.
Actually, this is wrong. Because, the wavetable is not where the waveforms are stored. The waveforms are stored in Rom or Ram. The wavetable is a just a table with pointers to where in Rom/Ram the sample to access is located.


Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowfac ➡️
Some particular synths, such as the PPG Wave, Walford Wave/Microwave range, and Korg Wavestation, are capable of switching or even interpolating between wavetables while a note is playing. PPG introduced the term wavetable in this context, and this is the reason many people think that wavetable-based synths are only limited to this particular way of wavetable scanning/switching/interpolation. This has only generated confusion about what a wavetable synth is or isn't.
So, neither you or me are wrong. It's just that you're following the PPG definition of "wavetable", whereas I adhere to the technical definition.
And what technical definition would that be ? By whom ?

I would say that PPG´s definition is the only one relevant as it was the first use of the term Wavetable in a synthesizer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowfac ➡️
Then again, even by the PPG definition, I would argue that the VS is a wavetable based synth. For example, the Waldorf Microwave series (typical wavetable synthesizers) are capable of interpolating between two adjacent waveforms stored in a 64-waveform table. In the case of the VS, one can interpolate between 4 fixed waveforms. So it is possible to switch or interpolate between different waveforms in a table.
No, here you are wrong again as the VS doesn´t allow you to switch between waveforms. It allows you to mix between 4 oscillators. That´s it.

WT
Old 25th January 2009 | Show parent
  #19
Lives for gear
 
shadowfac's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by waveterm ➡️
Actually, this is wrong. Because, the wavetable is not where the waveforms are stored. The waveforms are stored in Rom or Ram. The wavetable is a just a table with pointers to where in Rom/Ram the sample to access is located.
Of course they're stored in ROM or RAM. But the address space in which they're stored is called a wavetable.


Quote:
Originally Posted by waveterm ➡️
And what technical definition would that be ? By whom ?
Wikipedia, for starters:

Wavetable synthesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also, this book by Miller Puckette (the author of MAX and Puredata) is a great reference:

The Theory and Technique of Electronic Music

Quote:
Originally Posted by waveterm ➡️
I would say that PPG´s definition is the only one relevant as it was the first use of the term Wavetable in a synthesizer.
Yes, that is your opinion. Yet, many other people use the term wavetable in a more generic manner.


Quote:
Originally Posted by waveterm ➡️
No, here you are wrong again as the VS doesn´t allow you to switch between waveforms. It allows you to mix between 4 oscillators. That´s it.
Yes, it allows you to mix (interpolate) between 4 oscillators. Each oscillators produces a static waveform. The end result is an interpolation between the 4 waveforms which can be driven by the joystick or other modulators.
1
Share
Old 25th January 2009 | Show parent
  #20
Gear Addict
 
sheever's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Sequential Circuits created many innovative products during their ten year run from 1977 to 1987. Their first synthesizer, the Prophet-5 was the first programmable synth. The Studio 440 was the first sampling drum machine and The Prophet 2000 was one of the first affordable digital samplers. Who can forget the amazing Prophet T8 with it's weighted keys and classic Prophet sound. But perhaps their most innovative instrument (and one of my favorite synths) turned out to be one of their last products produced, The Prophet VS digital synthesizer.



The Prophet VS used Vector Synthesis as its revolutionary new means of sound creation. It uses a total of four oscillators per voice with 127 waveforms (32 user) and waveform crossfading using the joystick. The Prophet VS included 96 waveforms which were all 12-bit samples. Four of these waveforms are assigned to the oscillator slots and they are then processed by an analogue signal path, with low-pass filters based on the Curtis chips; the same that were used in the Prophet 5. The hybrid of digital and analogue helped make the Prophet VS sound very unique. The Prophet also included a very small amount of RAM that you can use to load in your own samples via the Midi sample dump standard. The OS revision of a VS can be checked during power up. Version 1.2 is the last update.
Old 25th January 2009 | Show parent
  #21
Gear Addict
 
sheever's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
http://www.retrosynth.com/docs/pvs/pvs_user.pdf

section 13.
Old 25th January 2009 | Show parent
  #22
Gear Addict
 
carbon111's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
The VS just cross fades between four digital oscillators - there's no interpolation going on at all. It's not a wavetable synth.

To address the original question, both synths use a completely different type of synthesis with a completely different architecture and don't really sound anything like each other. The OP should choose which one sounds best to his/her ears.
1
Share
Old 25th January 2009 | Show parent
  #23
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
My question is where doe sthe Korg Wavestation fit in this.
Old 25th January 2009 | Show parent
  #24
Lives for gear
 
waveterm's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Wave Sequencing ( and Vector Synthesis ) !

WT
Old 25th January 2009 | Show parent
  #25
Lives for gear
 
shadowfac's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by carbon111 ➡️
The VS just cross fades between four digital oscillators - there's no interpolation going on at all.
But crossfading *is* a form of interpolation. At least from a mathematical / signal-processing point of view.

Seriously, from a technical point of view, there's not much difference between what the VS and the Microwaves do (at oscillator/mixer level): the microwave oscillators are obtained by interpolating (crossfade) between waveforms A and B, where A and B are adjacent waveforms in the wavetable, and are allowed to vary over time; then, both oscillators are mixed (along with noise and ring mod). This means that, without considering noise and ring mod, there are four waveforms being interpolated to produce the mixer's output. In the VS, the four oscillators produce a static waveform, and the vector mixing engine interpolates them with different weights which may also vary over time. The difference is that in the microwave, the interpolation takes place in the oscillator stage, whereas in the VS interpolation is performed in the vector mixing stage.

Of course, from a synth architecture point of view, both synths are very different. The microwave's engine being probably more flexible due to its dynamic morphing across a 64-wave table; but the VS has four independently-tunable oscillators, which can probably produce sounds that the uWaves can't.
2
Share
Old 26th January 2009 | Show parent
  #26
Lives for gear
 
Heathfinnie's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowfac ➡️
Well then it must be true

I will also say that a VS is not wavetable synthesis. If it is considered by some, it's still not the same kind as used in PPG/Waldorf synths so the comparison is still off.
Old 26th January 2009 | Show parent
  #27
Lives for gear
 
shadowfac's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Whatever. This is obviously a synth forum, and as such, people don't seem to realize that the term "wavetable" has more popular and generic connotations than those attributed by PPG.
1
Share
Old 26th January 2009 | Show parent
  #28
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowfac ➡️
Whatever. This is obviously a synth forum, and as such, people don't seem to realize that the term "wavetable" has more popular and generic connotations than those attributed by PPG.
You remind me of that Illinois governor. Dude, just admit you're wrong. Everyone knows what a wavetable synth is, and the Prophet VS is not it.
Old 26th January 2009 | Show parent
  #29
Lives for gear
 
shadowfac's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by pyvnd ➡️
Dude, just admit you're wrong.
Am I?

Don't you think much more people (particularly outside this forum) are more familiar with Microsoft's GS Wavetable Software Synth (a pretty basic sample-playback synth) than with the PPG Wave?

How about some academic references?

Wavetable Synthesis

Wavetables and samplers

Wavetable Synthesis

Wavetable oscillators

WAVETABLE

MSP Tutorial 3: Wavetable Oscillator

SONiVOX Wavetables | Wavetables, Instruments and Sound Libraries for Java, PC, Mac and Embedded products

Wavetable Synthesis Techniques
Old 26th January 2009 | Show parent
  #30
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
shadowfac you are confusing two seperate uses of the word wavetable.
waveforms stored in ram/rom and using a lookup table to identify their locations for loading

vs.

a series of short single cycle waveforms whose sequence of playback is pre-determined by a lookup table.

the difference is subtle but is a big difference.

wavetable as applied as a synthesis method uses definition 2 which is the blofeld/ppg/wave/microwave/q.
wavetable as a portion of digital sample playback programming/nomenclature is definition 1.

we are either having a discussion on the fundamentals of digital pcm programming methods or talking about synths here. since i'm gonna go out on a limb and guess synths no the vs has no wavetable synthesis nor is it doing interpolation. interpolation is the manipulation of the digital data to smooth the logical waveform to avoid aliasing when switching between waves (think morph). the vs is actually playing back up to all 4 waves at once in some cases by simple analog mixing techniques, not digitally intepolating the wave cycle position by morphing the next cycle to fit the current slope.
Closed

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 378 views: 91935
Avatar for Lamster
Lamster 1st February 2021
replies: 91 views: 16149
Avatar for pigger1
pigger1 31st May 2021
replies: 83 views: 6082
Avatar for Noisewagon
Noisewagon 28th February 2019
replies: 5137 views: 347564
Avatar for wendell r.
wendell r. 9 hours ago

Forum Jump
Forum Jump