Novation Summit or....

[marino]

Ok guys, this is for my school, but indirectly for me as well, as I'm going to live with it for quite some time.

 

For my course of synth/keyboards for pianists, I have used the Alesis Ion as my main teaching tool for a long time. Strangely as it may seem, I haven't found a worthy replacement among more modern instruments. Its architecture is not intimidating for pianists lacking any knowledge of synths, yet so deep that I can push it into audio rate modulation territory for the most advanced/interested students. (I'm also teaching a programming course for electronic musicians which goes a lot deeper - but I use software for that)

 

Now, I'm not exactly in love with the sound quality of the Ion, but the more I use it, the more I admire and respect the guy(s) who designed it. With its excellent balance between synthesis power and ease of use, it's simply the perfect teaching tool.

But sadly, of the two Ions that the school had bought, one died a couple of years ago (declared "beyond repair" by the tech), and the other has already given conspicuous signs of decadence.

So, to avoid the risk of it exploding during a lesson, I have alerted the school that a replacement is to be considered.

 

The Novation Summit seems an obvious candidate. It apparently ticks all the boxes for the features I need, except for one: It uses potentiometers, while the Ion has endless encoders.

I'm sure that some fellow Cornerer recalls that I strongly prefer encoders to pots. And I am pretty sure that most students (and myself), used to the convenience of encoders, would feel programming with pots rather akward.

 

I have thought and I have searched, but I couldn't find an alternative to consider. So my question is...

Does anybody know of an instrument with similar specs to the Summit, but using mainly encoders?

Requirements:

- Hardware synth, with keyboard (velocity/aftertouch).

- "Extended subtractive" channel: Three oscillators with some wave mangling, dual filters, some fm, sync, at least three envs and three lfos.

- Knobby, with a good balance of knob-per-function and menus.

Extra points for the possibility of loading ext waves/wavetables.

 

The only thing that I can think of is the Hydrasynth - perhaps the Deluxe. But I believe that it could be a bit intimidating for pianists, with its few, multi-function encoders; plus I am not that enthusiastic about the sound (I have sold my Hydrasynth recently). Anyway, I'm still considering it.

 

Any other suggestion?

 

(Please don't turn this into a pots vs. encoders debate... I believe that we already had that a couple of times. Thanks! )

 

 

[timwat]

Didn't Nord Lead 3 move to encoders?

[CyberGene]

Hydrasynth.

 

P.S. Ohh, you've mentioned it, sorry.

P.P.S. Then Modal Argon/Cobalt.

P.P.P.S. Blofeld

[mate stubb]

Does it need to be polyphonic?

[AnotherScott]

40 minutes ago, timwat said:

Didn't Nord Lead 3 move to encoders?

 

Yes, and then moved back with the 4 and everything since. :-(

[marino]

48 minutes ago, timwat said:

Didn't Nord Lead 3 move to encoders?

 

I think so, I forgot that. I'll investigate it, thanks!!

 

 

4 minutes ago, mate stubb said:

Does it need to be polyphonic?

 

Yessss.

 

 

[jeffincltnc]

1 hour ago, timwat said:

Didn't Nord Lead 3 move to encoders?

 

Im just happy to see "Nord Lead" as a real legit answer to a question where it's not a running joke on this forum.  lol

[Tusker]

I can’t believe I am suggesting this but: Sequential Take 5?

[CyberGene]

23 minutes ago, Tusker said:

 

I can’t believe I am suggesting this but: Sequential Take 5?

 

Why can’t you believe it? 😀 BTW, I’m considering selling my Hydrasynth and keeping only the Take 5. Although from any logical point of view the Hydra is a much better synth I feel better with the Take 5 🧐

[mate stubb]

I was going to say PolyEvolver.

[Tusker]

39 minutes ago, CyberGene said:

Why can’t you believe it? 😀 BTW, I’m considering selling my Hydrasynth and keeping only the Take 5. Although from any logical point of view the Hydra is a much better synth I feel better with the Take 5 🧐

Compact real analog and price competitive too!! It didn’t used to be that way.

 

Some of the digital synths (Hydra) have extremely sophisticated oscillator options. Still with well voiced synths, the pareto rule applies: the first 20% of complexity gives you 80% of the expression.

 

Simplicity also forces you to learn the fundamentals deeply. (imo) 

[marino]

8 hours ago, CyberGene said:

Modal Argon/Cobalt.

 

I had not thought of it. Are you sure that they use encoders?

 

Blofeld?

 

Mmm, that would be a great choice, but not knobby enough, I'm afraid. Just four...

 

6 hours ago, Tusker said:

I can’t believe I am suggesting this but: Sequential Take 5?

 

Love the Take 5! But I'm afraid it would be a bit limited for this particular application. And I think most knobs are pots anyway.

 

5 hours ago, mate stubb said:

I was going to say PolyEvolver.

 

Oh, I would love it. I have the rack (PER), but the keyboard version (PEK) has become so rare and expensive. And the four voice polyphony could be limiting in some situations. Plus, most users have "upgraded" it to the pot edition instead of replacing the original encoders with the high-quality ALPS ones.
And frankly, I wouldn't use a PEK for teaching... I think I would bring it home and never return it...

[DeltaJockey]

Why does everyone hate pots?

I love my Summit, and the fact that it has pots is just like old my analog synths of the 70's!

 

I did have a Hydra for a couple of years.  For me the rotary encoders often meant that I had to use the visual feedback to see where I was, whereas the pots allow me to reference to the end points without looking. I suppose one advantage of encoders for a heavy use scenario is that they would likely last longer than pots.

 

I guess what I'm also saying is pots vs rotary encoders would not be a deal breaker for me, but then I'm not using the gear in your situation.🤐

 

BTW, I sold the Hydra only because I found the sound rather harsh and digital on my ears, whereas the Summit has a much warmer output, IMHO.

[CyberGene]

6 hours ago, marino said:

14 hours ago, CyberGene said:

Modal Argon/Cobalt.

 

I had not thought of it. Are you sure that they use encoders?

 

I haven't owned or even tested one (although I've been tempted many times) but here's what the spec page on the Modal website says:

Quote

Premium FATAR 37-key Keyboard with velocity and channel aftertouch 

29 endless encoders, 24 buttons

 

[marino]

6 hours ago, CyberGene said:

 

I haven't owned or even tested one (although I've been tempted many times) but here's what the spec page on the Modal website says:

 

 

That's very interesting, thanks. I'd need at least 49 keys, but I think they have several keyboard lenghts to choose from.

Another one to investigate...

[marino]

7 hours ago, DeltaJockey said:

Why does everyone hate pots?

 

Well, from previous discussions, I have the impression that most people on this forum *love* pots.

Personally, I strongly prefer encoders on a synth *with patch memory*. To me, the reason is obvious... but I guess everybody feels more at home with the system he grew up with.

Btw as I said, I'd prefer not to resume that kind of debate here.

 

 

[CyberGene]

BTW Modal recently released firmware 3.0 for the Argon8 (including better vintage analog approximations) and some of the demos were so dope, especially one junoish, I barely abstained from ordering one. I don’t care too much for the Cobalt that is specifically a VA, but the Argon is both a wavetable and a VA now with even lusher VA abilities that I believe is a very mature product. If I hadn’t sworn to stop purchasing hardware synth I would’ve got one already 😀

[marino]

Well, I had overlooked the Argon and Cobalt so far, so I just had a look at the manuals and heard some demos - and they seem very nice synths, both of them! The 8X versions with a 5-octave keyboard, in particular, look very good.

Possible drawbacks include a minuscule screen, so you have to use multiple button pushes on the panel to reach certain functions. Also, the Argon has 4 oscs per voice (great), while the Cobalt has two "oscillator groups", with audio-rate functions included in each - which could be confusing for beginners. And the Argon has just two LFOs, one of which is global?!

So I'm not sure; I would like to put my hands on one to check the workflow. But first, I'm going to try the Summit in person. I should be able to reach one on next weekend...   🎹

[Stokely]

I have a Summit, and a couple factors that I happen to like that probably won't be considered.

Novation in my experience has excellent support.  They were willing to discuss an issue with the global local on/off with me at length.  I've had one other interaction with them and so far they are not your typical company to talk with (Radial is similar, in my experience).

The Summit comes with an excellent web-based librarian that makes it really easy to assemble, save and load your own custom banks.  This also includes a lot of patches done by others, though to be fair not as many "bread and butter" ones useful for classic rock as I'd like.  A ton of what I'd call "experimental" and "avante garde" sounds!      This sounds like a minor deal, but my buddy with his Prophet didn't have a way to build banks, not without buying a librarian (I guess there could be some free ones out there). 

I love the Summit but I may be selling to someone who can put it to use.  I'm all software at home, and my band needs far more organ than synth.

[marino]

On 3/21/2023 at 8:46 PM, Stokely said:

I have a Summit, and a couple factors that I happen to like that probably won't be considered.

Novation in my experience has excellent support.  They were willing to discuss an issue with the global local on/off with me at length.  I've had one other interaction with them and so far they are not your typical company to talk with (Radial is similar, in my experience).

The Summit comes with an excellent web-based librarian that makes it really easy to assemble, save and load your own custom banks.  This also includes a lot of patches done by others, though to be fair not as many "bread and butter" ones useful for classic rock as I'd like.  A ton of what I'd call "experimental" and "avante garde" sounds!      This sounds like a minor deal, but my buddy with his Prophet didn't have a way to build banks, not without buying a librarian (I guess there could be some free ones out there). 

I love the Summit but I may be selling to someone who can put it to use.  I'm all software at home, and my band needs far more organ than synth.

 

Thanks! That's all very useful info.

With the occasion, please allow me to take advantage of you being around to ask a couple of questions about things I couldn't clarify from the manual...  

- In the Summit, can you put the potentiometers in "pass thru" mode (or whatever they call it)? It's when moving the knobs has no effect until it meets the stored value.

- When using the dual filters in parallel mode, can you direct the different oscillators and noise to one filter exclusively? Let's say, oscillators to filter 1 and noise to filter 2? I mean within single patches, without layering.

Thankssss in advance!!  🙃

[Stokely]

Unfortunately I would have to...consult the manual   I'm very much a patch tweaker when it comes to synthesis, and my patch needs are generally quite basic.  

[marino]

44 minutes ago, Stokely said:

Unfortunately I would have to...consult the manual   I'm very much a patch tweaker when it comes to synthesis, and my patch needs are generally quite basic.  

 

Ok, I found the first one: It's called "Pickup" mode, in the Settings menu.

About the second one (directing individual oscillators or noise to just one of the filters in Parallel mode) I guess it's not possibile, as the manual doesn't seem to mention it.

Btw any clarification from Summit/Peak owners would be welcome!

[CyberGene]

52 minutes ago, marino said:

In the Summit, can you put the potentiomenters in "pass thru" mode (or whatever they call it)? It's when moving the knobs has no effect until it meets the stored value.

As an ex-owner of the Peak, which should be the same, yes, you can. What is more, on the display you can see what the stored value is vs the current value. It’s one of the best implementations of pots. Because on the Take 5, for instance, you don’t see any numeric values or any hint of the direction in which you need to turn the pot to match the stored value which is the most annoying thing about it. Only when you match the stored value will it show a small dot in the 3-digit display but you need to turn VERY slowly and stop blinking or you would miss it. 
 

That being said, the Peak sounded always too dull and generic for me. Such a great concept that I tried to love but couldn’t. The Take 5 in comparison is as good as it gets. 

[Stokely]

I agree that the Summit is maybe a bit generic, but that also makes it very versatile.  I debated it vs the Rev2, and that versatility finally pushed me toward the Summit.  It could do some rhodes-ish and pluck sounds well and in fact I used it for such on a few songs where I didn't want to bother doing a split on my Modx.  I did the melody guitar part on Long Train Running on it  

It's well-built and as I say the librarian is not to be discounted.   Ironically I tended to almost always use mine in single mode (so basically a Peak).  That is one reason I have decided to sell it--I can always get a Peak and fold it into my two-keyboard rig if I want the sounds I used.   Or an OB6 of course if I'm after a desktop  

 

[CyberGene]

The Peak was absolutely great in any respect, build quality, feel of the pots, concepts, manual, usability, attention to detail, refinement, patch management, software. I still miss it for these reasons alone. Just having a simple sine wave with slight analog distortion and the ultra-creamy reverb was something that I could use for hours. However at the time I was (and still am) obsessed with having vintage analog sounds, ones that resemble a Moog, a Prophet, an OB, etc. and it's where I struggled with the Peak. Here's a demo I recorded on the very first day I received it with a patch I created basically for a few minutes from scratch:

 

Listening to it again, I miss the Peak so much! I need this patch again.

[CyberGene]

BTW, the above patch makes use of polyphonic aftertouch (I play on a CME XKeys Air 37 and the Peak supports it straight away) and I would prefer a Peak again over a Summit which only has channel aftertouch.

[RABid]

Well, I'm going to suggest something very different than what you mentioned or what has been suggested. The Jupiter X. It sounds good and the layout is fine for programming Jupiter sounds. But it will offer more teaching options. The Juno can be used to show how to get more with less, and the importance of effects. The JV can introduce ROMpler sounds as you teach them how to blend, layer, and even use samples as a synth oscillator. It may not be the sexy choice, but it is very relevant in how to approach real world modern synths on stage.

[marino]

20 hours ago, RABid said:

Well, I'm going to suggest something very different than what you mentioned or what has been suggested. The Jupiter X. It sounds good and the layout is fine for programming Jupiter sounds. But it will offer more teaching options. The Juno can be used to show how to get more with less, and the importance of effects. The JV can introduce ROMpler sounds as you teach them how to blend, layer, and even use samples as a synth oscillator. It may not be the sexy choice, but it is very relevant in how to approach real world modern synths on stage.

 

This is another good one I had not thought of. I have to dig about its features from a pure synthesis standpoint, and the workflow, etc. - but in fact, we do talk quite a bit about layering synthesized sounds with samples. I have to MIDI the Ion to a Motif XF to demonstrate this, though.

Does the Jupiter X use encoders?

[marino]

14 minutes ago, marino said:

Does the Jupiter X use encoders?

 

Ooops, silly question... it's mainly sliders.

[CyberGene]

I ordered the Jupiter Xm some time ago. While waiting for it to become available I downloaded the manual and it completely convinced me I won't like it due to a tiny screen and a lot of menu diving with non-intuitive concepts, so I canceled the order. I consider myself a rather experienced synth guy but I still had problems understanding its design. Not sure it's the best synth for students learning synthesis.