Speculating on buying a prophet 5

[anykeystudio]

The guy I talked to says he have a Prophet 5 rev 3.0 and have a Firmware(OS) Rev 8.1. He says that the midi kit from Sequential doesn

[Rasmus-DK]

 

Originally posted by anykeystudio The guy I talked to says he have a Prophet 5 rev 3.0 and have a Firmware(OS) Rev 8.1. He says that the midi kit from Sequential doesn

[clusterchord]

Speculating on buying a prophet 5

 

you don't say? well, if its in good shape and priced within reason - GRAB IT !!

 

 

REV 1 and REV 2.0 - 2.3 all use SSM chips - different sound/hardware to say the least. thow to recognize them quickly? the pots in filter section go zig-zag instead of uniform placement on later REV3 models.

 

 

REV 3.0 - 3.3 - uses CEM chips. the later, more stable version.

 

 

 

u can inquire about MIDI interfaces, compatibility issues and possible update to 3.2 or 3.3 status, on following locations:

 

http://www.analogsynthservice.com/index.html - Greg Montalbano is a great guy and specializes in Prophet servicing. he should know what your options are.

 

http://www.winecountrysequential.com/page4.html - well known dealer for prophet parts, service updates etc.. if info isnt already on their pager, you can email them your q.

[WhinyLittleRunt]

Go for it. Those are great synths!

 

 

As my boss says....spend your money!

[anykeystudio]

Good point, spend it when you have it. Well I have to call the guy and ask the state of it. But from what I heard the rev 2 and 3 are the ones more desired. Is that so, what should you pay for a working unit.

 

I could tell my girlfriend that the summer vacation is of, due to unexpected expenses

[Miket156]

There was no Rev zero. They were just called Prophet 5's when they were introduced. (later called Rev 1 when Rev 2 came out) Dave Smith did design changes in the Rev 2 and 3, hence the REV versions. Personally, I wouldn't buy anything earlier than a Rev 3, which is what I have. The earlier versions overheaded, so they started putting heat sinks on the back to cool them off. Also made changes to the hardware in the box, different chips.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From Synthmuseum.com: Rev 2 was a refinement of the original design and largely transparent. Rev 3, however, was a vastly different synthesizer than Revs 1 and 2. Introduced to Rev 3 were new voltage controlled IC's (CEM), an improved ADC, DAC, and a different control voltage distribution scheme. More sophisticated editing and tuning routines were designed, and to improve servicibility, voice trimmers were reduced from 80 to 45.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The earlier Prophets were too flaky when compared to a Rev 3, however, they had a somewhat fatter sound because of the components that were in the early ones that made they sound great, also made them flaky. If you actually want to PLAY it, get the Rev 3. Rev 2 sounded great, and were more stable than the Rev 1, but I held off for the Rev 3 and it works well, even after 23 years.

 

I don't know about the Sequential Midi kit not working, maybe it doesn't work with earlier versions, but they did retro fit the Rev 3 with midi kits when Sequential was still in business. Kenton is suppose to have a GREAT Midi kit for the Prophets, and it should work well with the Rev 3. If you order it from Kenton, they will ask you what the MFG date and serial number is, as well as what Rev version you have.

 

Something to keep in mind, you can upgrade the number of user patch storage space on a Rev 3.x from 40 patches to 120 patches with a upgrade kit from Wine Country Sequential. I bought one for my Rev 3.2 (I haven't installed it yet) and it was only about 25 bucks. I don't know if the Rev 3.0 will need additional chips and cost a little more, but I think its still pretty reasonable. 120 patch locations is a big plus for a Prophet, there's so much you can do with it and it would be a shame to have limited storage space.

 

What's the guy asking for it? What to pay for it is a good question. I think the "average" price for a REV 3 is about 1500 USD. Recently, someone had a MINT 3.3 and was asking 3000 USD. Kept in a studio, NEVER moved, it looked brand new. However, I wouldn't pay that much for ANY Prophet. Its really going to depend on what kind of condition its in. If its all scratched up, then it wasn't handled properly, and may have had more than one owner. If it was used on the road, there will be some cosmetic sratches, but I will still avoid one that doesn't look like its in really good condition.

 

 

Mike T.

[clusterchord]

1500 is going price for REV3.3 120 memories and MIDI. i've been following these prices for a while now..

 

3.1 and 3.2 can be easily updated to 3.3 status.

 

 

on REV2 which btw sounds more like a cross between REV3 and old discrete based synths like OB-X or SEMs, the desirable vesion is 2.2 or 2.3 because they can be MIDI-ized. the 1.0 and 2.0 are problematic. Wine country doesn't even want to fix them (!!), altough Greg will. he even knows what to do with the powersupply and cooling to maker it stable and durable.

 

funny thing is, no matter CEMs have better tuning stability and are less prone to die from heat - they are sooo much more sensitive to problems in power supply and variations in power;

 

some people had all CEMs in a P5 or OB fried this way. again, Greg addresed this issue - you need to upgrade capacitors in pwr supply, and add some kind of current limiter etc.. dunno the exact details.

 

 

so, to correct my hasty recommendation to buy it, from the previous post - yes, buy it, but only if you have a tech in Goteborg or Stockholm that really knows what he is doing with SCI stuff.

[anykeystudio]

Thanks guys for valuable input. I know a lot more of the prophet family now. The seller did change the EPROM from the old called 2708 to the 2716 which came with the rev 1 and later (to quote him).

His asking 1570$ without midi and I haven

[Jack Luminous]

 

Originally posted by anykeystudio Thanks guys for valuable input. I know a lot more of the prophet family now. The seller did change the EPROM from the old called 2708 to the 2716 which came with the rev 1 and later (to quote him). His asking 1570$ without midi and I haven

[Miket156]

1570 is a "Little" high, but not too much. I know our European friends pay more for gear than we do in the US, but I would still try to get it for less. I've seen Rev 3.0 go for 1200 or 1250 on Ebay. Timing is important too, prices vary, depending on who wants one when its for sale. Are you going to get a chance to see it and PLAY it before you buy it?

 

As far as the tech in Paris that installs "his own" Midi kits, he may be a great tech, but its wise to buy a MIDI kit from a manufacturer, like Kenton that has standard parts and replacement parts if something goes wrong. I realize MIDI is not brain surgery, but what happens if he goes out of business, or worse, dies. Stick with off the shelf parts.

 

Mike T.

[clusterchord]

That is a ok price in EU for a REV2 if in great shape, but not more.

 

especially if you consider the shipping and availability factor, if you were to get it from US.

 

but, altough i'm desiring an SSM based Prophet, i'm not sure i'd buy a REV1, unless i personally checked it's in perfect and stable condition. They're risky. There was one locally, also a REV1 and it was in sorry shape..

 

 

there was one REV2.3 with MIDI i missed 3 months ago. mint. i 'll never forgive myself.. someone grabbed it in front of my nose.

[Jack Luminous]

 

Originally posted by Miket156 As far as the tech in Paris that installs "his own" Midi kits, he may be a great tech, but its wise to buy a MIDI kit from a manufacturer, like Kenton that has standard parts and replacement parts if something goes wrong. I realize MIDI is not brain surgery, but what happens if he goes out of business, or worse, dies. Stick with off the shelf parts.

 

 

He uses off the shelf part as much as any manufacturer... You realize any manufacturer offering this kind of custom small market service like Kenton or Wine County can go out of business any day ?? I just offered infos for the original poster because he seems to be located in Europe. It happens that the guy I'm talking about is the best service for Sequential I know in Europe. People are sending him things for repair or customize from overseas. Further, he's the only one I know who can replace the internal AD of a Prophet. I know wine County can't do it (or doesn't want to).

[aeon]

Rev.1 = no way!

 

Rev.2 = the best.

 

Rev.3 = only if you can't do Rev.2

 

 

cheers,

aeon

[mrcpro]

From guy who was around back then...

 

Rev 2 Prophets were unreliable even when they were new. There are very good reasons why Sequential stopped making them at the height of their popularity. If you are considering buying one, I hope you are rich enough and have tech support lined up to keep it going.

 

Yes, I have played both Rev 2's and 3's, and the filters on the 2's are noticably warmer and fuller. Dave Rossum and Ron Dow, who designed the SSM filter chips, were deliberately trying to get the Moog sound on a chip, and patented their concept of replacing the Moog transister ladder with current mirrors so no one else could copy it. To these ears, they got closer than any one else at the time...(the Memorymoog was still 5 years away).

[Ed A.]

Why not save up a little and get Dave Smith's new PolyEvolver keyboard instead? It's got the Prophet 5/Prophet VS sound in one keyboard, plus that excellent step sequencer. Not to mention that it will be under warranty by a company that's still in business.

[Dave Bryce]

 

Originally posted by mrcpro Rev 2 Prophets were unreliable even when they were new. There are very good reasons why Sequential stopped making them at the height of their popularity.

Dave Smith says the same thing.

 

He says that the SSM chips were pretty unreliable, especially after the units had been on for a while - that was the main reason that they changed to the CEM chips.

 

 

I have played both Rev 2's and 3's, and the filters on the 2's are noticably warmer and fuller.

Dave actually attributes the difference in sound between Rev 2 and Rev 3 P5's more to oscillator instability in the Rev 2 units than the differences in the filters between the two revs.

 

He says that they would get Rev 2 units back for repair, and they would tighten up the oscillators and people would complain that the units didn't sound as fat.

 

dB

DSI

[The Real MC]

Dave actually attributes the difference in sound between Rev 2 and Rev 3 P5's more to oscillator instability in the Rev 2 units than the differences in the filters between the two revs.

 

I have to disagree with Mr. Smith. Tony Clark brought a rev 2 and a rev 3 Prophet-5 at AHMW where I was able to do an A/B comparision. The SSM filter in the rev 2 sounded MUCH better, while the CEM VCOs in the rev3 definitely were tighter tuning. The difference between SSM and CEM filters, particularily their resonant qualities, were night and day. VCO instability has no direct impact on filter resonant quality.

 

I did a little poking around and found this nice page of Prophet-5 rev differences.

 

This is a rev 2 Prophet-5.

 

 

This is a rev 3 Prophet-5.

 

 

Note the different controls in the upper right hand corner. Rev 3 has a pair of pushbutton switches, rev 2 has a knob. That the most obvious way of telling them apart.

 

I wasn't able to find a pic online of a rev 1 Prophet-5, but I do know that they have the power switch in the upper right corner of the front panel. The rev 1 is strictly collector's fodder as there were only a couple hundred made, they are difficult to keep running, they use extremely rare parts, and most tech shops will not touch a rev 1 P5.

[Dave Bryce]

Originally posted by The Real MC I have to disagree with Mr. Smith. Tony Clark brought a rev 2 and a rev 3 Prophet-5 at AHMW where I was able to do an A/B comparision. The SSM filter in the rev 2 sounded MUCH better, while the CEM VCOs in the rev3 definitely were tighter tuning. The difference between SSM and CEM filters, particularily their resonant qualities, were night and day. VCO instability has no direct impact on filter resonant quality.

I didn't mean to imply that the only difference in the sound was as a result of oscillator stability - sorry if that was unclear.

 

Dave said that he believes that the greater degree of warmth/fatness that people seem to attribute to the Rev 2 units has more to do with the oscillators than anything else, but he says that all sorts of things play into it as well (filters. EGs, noise, VCAs).

 

Dave definitely agrees that the filters didn't sound the same in the two instruments (particularly their resonant qualities), but he still says he feels that 80% of the sounds in the Rev 2 and 3 were very similar.

 

YMMV, of course...

 

dB

DSI

[aeon]

 

Originally posted by Ed A. Why not save up a little and get Dave Smith's new PolyEvolver keyboard instead? It's got the Prophet 5/Prophet VS sound in one keyboard...

 

 

As a former P5 owner, and former Evolver owner, and former VS user, I would say that neither the P5 or VS sound is inside the Evolver series.

 

And that takes nothing away from the Evolver, but just because it is made by DSI doesn't mean there is SCI sound in there.

 

IMHO.

 

 

cheers,

aeon

[Miket156]

Quote by The Real MC

 

==============================

I have to disagree with Mr. Smith.

==============================

 

That's RICH.

 

It takes a lot of BALLS to disagree with the man that invented that synthesizer, as well as built and serviced them. Give me a break.

 

 

Mike T.

[The Real MC]

What balls? A point was clarified and agreed to by all parties.

[aeon]

Originally posted by Miket156 Quote by The Real MC ============================== I have to disagree with Mr. Smith. ============================== That's RICH. It takes a lot of BALLS to disagree with the man that invented that synthesizer, as well as built and serviced them. Give me a break.

 

It takes a lot of something else to comment incorrectly on a discussion that you were clearly not following closely.

 

And hey mang, please do learn to use the quote function!

 

 

cheers,

aeon

[Miket156]

I read the entire discussion. I realize that Dave Bryce enhanced his original statement. But I think that disagreeing with Dave Smith about what made sonic differences in the Prophet 5 is like telling Robert Moog how to design a synthesizer.

 

 

Mike T.

[aeon]

 

Originally posted by Miket156 I read the entire discussion. I realize that Dave Bryce enhanced his original statement. But I think that disagreeing with Dave Smith about what made sonic differences in the Prophet 5 is like telling Robert Moog how to design a synthesizer.

 

 

Understood, but the fact you just said what you said indicates you read the entire discussion, but you didn't follow it closely.

 

Note that no one disagreed with Dave Smith about what made sonic differences in the Prophet 5 in general, they commented on one aspect specifically, so it in no way challenged, much less invalidated, what Dave Smith said.

 

 

be well,

aeon

[clusterchord]

fwiw Mike, Bob Moog wouldn't have come up with half of the stuff he did if there wasn't for valuable input from great musicians. From early fundamental developments like the concept of filter (i think it was Morton subotnick that told him this), and to the more advanced tehniques of late 60s and 70s with enormous feedback from W Carlos and the likes..

 

 

also, i tend to agree with Michael, the difference of Prophet revisions is considerable, altough similarities are unoavoidable when accompanying electronics and the whole arhitecture is the same. i'd even go as far to say that i don't think one is better then the other - but that the sound of REV2 is what i'm looking for, and what i need/want for my music.. nothing more/nothing less. CEM sound is, well.. CEM sound. (so in certain aspects of sound even OB-8 has more similarities with REV3 thanks to similar single 24dB CEM3320 filter topology (unlike OBXA)).

 

there's lot examples in recordings from late 70s and early 80s where you can easily spot the difference of P5s. on some sounds more than the others. the fact that their sonic palette overlaps to an extent, doesn't prove they are the same. like in so many other examples.

 

its sort of like difference of OB-X and OB-Xa. only somebody who hasn't played or heard them can ever claim they are the same.

 

or JP6 and JP8 etc. Synth industry is full of examples like this.

 

nothing to get excited about.