What do G2/NM users think about the DSI Evolver/MEK?

[dualphin]

Just curious—

I am asking specifically the G2/NM user community (of which I am now proudly a member) what y'all think about the dsi Evolver?

You too, e80—you tried it?

Thanks pals,

d

[elektro80]

Oh yes.. I have.

Actually, the MEK and PEK are on my wish list. I do however have too much gear already and every time I try to get rid of something I end up with even more. This gotta stop!

As if..


The Evolver desktop version is very good but I think that for my use the interface is a bit too cumbersome. The MEK and PEK are perfect though. The sound quality is excellent. The instrument design and signal routing/ modulation etc is rather deep.


Anyways, now my wife wants a Korg D3200 and more two tier keyboard stands.

[dualphin]

e80,

I thought you might feel that way. I owned previously a desktop version. Very flexible, but one has to think too much to actually use the mod routings. But I have tried the MEK, and it makes the modulations much more accessible.

As I noted in a previous post, I am considering letting go of my Cwejman S1mk2. It is a wonderful synth, very powerful, but it feels incomplete to me. As far as oscillators, filters, mixers, and midi>cv, it is incredible. But when it comes to control voltages and modulation, it is not so interesting to me. And having to override the normalized connections in order to make use of some functions is hard on my brain. I find the G2 much more easy, in that I can place the modules where I want them in the editor, and I can organize the controls how I wish on the panel. Plus, for mod and cv, it is unbeatable. And it has memory.

The sound has something lacking, but I don't mind. I plan to make up for it with another synth or two. But what it does (which are most things) it is incredible.

I am considering replacing the Cwejman with an MEK. And maybe the ASB Prodyssey. I am actually looking forward to the sound of the MEK as a replacement for the Cwejman. I think its somewhat thinner sound will be great for a more sinister bass. Plus, I like how its delays are just as much integrated synthesis elements as effects.

I also can imagine using the MEK like an acoustic guitar—for jamming, "open mic" kind of stuff, or just unwinding. The G2 has too much thinking involved for that—and DS rightly named the Evolver—it is really great for slowly developing a patch from one sound to another.

I would love to sit in the back yard, playing and tweaking the MEK through an amp, while someone else plays hand drums or sings or plays guitar or makes orgasm sounds or whatever.

Another reason to prefer the MEK over the CS1mk2—no patch cords. And it can be expanded into polyphony via the rack.

Okay—
don't know where this discussion is going— would be cool if it went somewhere....

d

[fac]

[dualphin]

BTW,

Why does she want a D3200?


As an "alternative to a daw"?


I think I would rather use one of those than a PC-based system—maybe.

d

[elektro80]

[dasz]

THe g2 sound is thinner in comparison to other synths, but it is by design, as the g2 has to sound like anything, thus it has to be flexible sonically. THere are many ways to add character (lots' of post around here), but in the end it sounds like a nord, a bit on a the cold side.

So when searching for another synth, getting something with warmth, meat, wavetables seems like a great solution to complement your g2 with (especially if it has an analog in which means it can be used like a module in your g2:) )

I had an evolver with my G2. I tend to keep my setup very simple, so the evolver was my only other type of synth (in addition to my g2's).

Here is a post of a comparison of a g2 with an evolver running into it.
http://electro-music.com/forum/viewtopic.php?highlight=nord++evolver&t=16883

It was ok, but monophonic, and you can't sweep the wavetables (they are selectable but not interpolating like a waldorf microwave), and you only have the one filter, and you have to keep watching your levels, but the distortion and feedback circuitry produces some really aggressive and brilliant sound. I used tuned feedback to change the character of the filter.

The evolver for me had a dry sound, and easily made very aggressive, but the filter is wonderful (albeit only the 24db one). the panel of the desktop evolver is a bit awkward.

I would not recommend it as a your only 2nd synth. I ended up selling mine, and getting a waldorf xt which I think is way better bang for the buck (the filters are amazing, including a very dynamic waveshaper filter, and very flexible, multi timbral, polyphonic, and it still has a line in, and 2 sets of outs, fx), and it can be lush, warm, rich but also very aggressive if needed, essentially more flexible and the xt panel speaks for itself. I don't see the xt leaving my studio. or get a blofeld, but this does not have analog in, and the panel is smaller, but it is a new synth from waldorf and it is amazing.

Also I think maybe a prophet8 would be a better choice than an evolver, or at least a MEK (mono evolver keyboard).

Just my opinion.
/Dasz

[steve m]

I havn't had the opportunity to play an Evolver but I did purchase a DS Prophet 8 last week, I thought it would be a nice addition to my collection and work well with the G2X.

The sound of the Prophet is very warm just like you would expect of a top-end analog board, but compared to the user interface of the G2X it's not good ! As you guys know, programmed properly the G2X displays every parameter you need and gives you real time tweak feedback via the LED rosette's around the knobs. You can see at a glance by going through each page what control is set to what position. Not so the Prophet - the feedback is via a single two line LCD display and only shows one control at a time, and only when you twiddle the knob. There is just no at-a glance indication of anything.

I found it difficult to work out what was going on in the presets onboard the Prophet - it takes way too long to find what's routed where and how.
I did find a couple of really good patches on the P8 but managed to recreate them almost perfectly on the G2X.

Considering the price is about the same, the G2X is way better and therefore my Prophet is for sale. The G2x is now a keeper.

[dasz]

Ah, nice point re the knobs and interface. this was a weird thing on the evolver, as the evolver knobs are infinite, but have a indent which means nothing (it's position is wherever you twisted it), as soon as you change rows of parameters or patches, the knob position becomes meaningless. A bit distracting.

This is another reason I like the xt (and other 2nd generation waldorf synths), the knobs are infinite with NO indent. They are blunt about it.

For me, It's actually a great solution, as you already hear what is going on (standard subtractive synth layout), as your ears are your guide.

Mind you on a g2 (or NL3) the led knobs are the ideal display method, but not having a preview of all the parameters on other synths is not a biggie for me.
/Dasz

[pstnotpd]

Well, I have a PEK/PER combination (8 voices) for over a year now and a G2 since it came out, so here we go.

I'm a knobby kinda guy, so I didn't bother installing the evolver editors, though I do have them. The interface it pretty intuitive to me, though I do miss the clavia leds.

Soundwise I would say the PEK/PER is "in your face" to the max. Subtle sounds are in there, but require careful editing. I tried to re-create the lushness of my JX10 but I still don't quite get it. The G2 is a lot smoother sounding. I don't think the G2 lacks character, it's just different. The 4 voices on a PEK are not quite enough for polyphonic playing, so the PER addition is a bit of a must.

The PEK sequencers are a bit awkward to work with, but do the job adequately. The non interpolating wavetable sequencing is really a shame and I hope DS will fix that some time, though I doubt it. It would greatly enhance the possibilities to the wavestation realm, but for now I'll have to do with the real deal.

The endless modulation possibilities while not having to use a computer or endless menus really makes the PEK a winner in my book. It's really inspiring. I'm not sure if I'd feel the same about only a PER or a evolver desktop though. As it stands the PEK/PER is my main experimental gear, despite the fact that the G2 is really more powerful in that respect. It's just the computer editing that puts me off.....

I'm really curious about the solaris though......

[mother misty]

[dualphin]

I hope this thread hasn't died yet... wife just finished her school year... planning (although not absolutely certain) on moving to Philadelphia to pursue music as full-time as we can.

Dasz, I knew you had a Waldorf XT, and that you gave up the Evolver. It is another of the synths I wish to have eventually. I wonder what you think about the interface? How much menu-diving is necessary? I kind of have the feeling that the interface is just a little too visual, like (but not so bad as) the Spectralis I need to get rid of. Visual, as in, here's this menu, then this number, turn the knob and the number changes. I like the tactility of the MEK, and the way you can organize the interface on the G2. How tactile is the XT interface? It seems to me that a little to much thinking is involved in programming it. It just seems somehow a bit cerebral to me... does anyone know what I mean? But I have no doubts about the sound. And of course there is a ton of thinking involved in programming the G2, but a lot of this for me involves interface choices.

I have concerns too about using it as my only 2nd synth. But I know the Evolver interface, and that fact in itself is a strong plus in my book. Monophony and non-interpolating wavetables are a big minus.

How about a G2-MEK-XT combo? Alongside an MPC 2500? How do folks think that would sound? (Please, nobody say that "it will sound like however you make it sound.") I have a feeling it would sound pretty bright and clear. This is a quite interesting possibility to me.

I imagine using the G2 and MEK for a lot of processing and resampling for the MPC. I think I could get a nice, grainy sound for that. While Depeche Mode had a dark, clear, spacious, and sometimes spiky sound, I think I could get a mellow, clear or gritty, claustrophobic thing going. Wow, I feel silly trying to describe this. But it is in my head, after all. I think with the G2-MEK-XT-MPC I could get a very unique sound—these are all instruments (MPC excepted) which have an intrinsically experimentalist mentality built in.

I probably would get a John Bowen Solaris if it came in a 3-octave version!

anyway,
d

[dasz]

dualphin,

[dualphin]

Dasz,

Yes, that was extremely helpful. Thank you much.

A couple questions: so things like wavetable modulation are pretty accessible from the panel? How about the mod matrix? When is menu-diving involved?

And regarding a mixer—I was just planning on getting an Echo Audiofire 12, and doing all my mixing in a DAW. Although lately I have been reconsidering that. This is one aspect of PC-based recording that I have been unable to really understand. What are the advantages of a mixer over a simple audio interface? And vice versa? The Mackie 1202 isn't an i/o, so how do you use it with a DAW? Do you run it into an i/o?

I really appreciate my inquiries being taken so seriously by everyone.

Thanks,
d

[dualphin]

Also, any thoughts, anyone, for XT vs. Blofeld?

Or where can I find a good discussion on the topic?

d

[elektro80]

I´d say that the Blofeld is in many ways far more advanced and offering even more patching options and the sound quality is excellent. The XT does however have a few very nice features that the Blofeld lacks. The BLofeld is also a product of the incarnation of the Waldorf company and it comes with a warranty. The interface is in fact pretty good but it is not really an excellent synth for those who like to tweak as they play.

The Blofeld is however probably one of the hottest desktop micro synths so far. It is an instant classic.

[kvnvk]

I have to agree with what elektro80 said about the Blofeld, actual real-time tweaking is a bit hampered by the matrix editing, but I personally don't find that a problem. editing is pretty easy and intuative once you're familiar with the interface, which doesn't take as long as you'd suspect. I used to own a Microwave XT a couple of years ago, regret selling it, but the Blofeld is a more than suitable replacement. I really couldn't recommend one over the other as either one would be an excellent addition to the G2.

[elektro80]

[elektro80]

I should add that I´m also impressed by the terrain covered by the sound engine in the Blofeld. This is not simply a cheap repackaging of the Waldorf signature sounds from the late 90s.

[iPassenger]

Elektro,

Could you maybe stop telling me how awesome the blofeld is, it is not helping my blofeld GAS at all. I swear that my bloody credit card is talking to me about buying one at the moment as it is.

[elektro80]

Right, I´ll let your card do the talking!


Yes, the Blofeld is good, but you should rather spend some time with one instead of listening to me. It either suits your style of working or not.

Hmm.. those talking credit cards... I´ve got a few of those myself. My Mastercard is saying: Q960! Get a Q960!


I´m trying to ignore it!

[dasz]

Ok, I know the term "Gear Lust" but what's G.A.S. stand for (and I don't mean the burping or stinky type).

Seriously though, the blofeld is tempting me too. even though I have an xt. but then I really can't justify having both (unless the midi implementation of the blofeld actually matched that of the xt's panel which it does not). the xt has analog ins 4 outs, and all those knobs and I know it well. if I had to sell the xt (for some strange reason), I would buy a blofeld.

/Dasz

[elektro80]

[BobTheDog]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xyabb-8iWjI sounds good to me.

[dasz]

hey Andy, good link. damn that is a phat sound ... i like the od sound. good!

hmmm ...
/Dasz