Sequential Take 5

[GovernorSilver]

The demos sound great and the price is unbelievable. What"s the catch? Why is this cheaper than the Prophet 5? BTW I thought it was made in China in order to be cheap but on a picture from Thomann it says 'assembled in USA'.

 

Rumor has it Take 5 does not have the CEM 3340 VCOs that are in the Prophet 5. I don't know how much cost savings this contributed though, if true.

 

More obvious cost savings was from not having wood sides. Some peeps are saying wood is getting more and more expensive.

[Doerfler]

'

More obvious cost savings was from not having wood sides. Some peeps are saying wood is getting more and more expensive.

 

and labor costs associated with assembling them

[GovernorSilver]

'

More obvious cost savings was from not having wood sides. Some peeps are saying wood is getting more and more expensive.

 

and labor costs associated with assembling them

 

Indeed. I have to imagine Sequential (and Focusrite???) figured out a way to make Take 5 with lower labor costs than the Prophet 5 (keyboard or module). But how that works exactly.... well, I'm sure we, or at least I... will be educated on that soon enough

[GovernorSilver]

On another forum, somebody complained the Soundcloud demos made him feel Take 5 is intended only for funk keyboard players.

 

First time I've seen "suitable for funk" stated as a bad thing.

Maybe whoever complained would prefer having the demos done by Nick Semrad, Matt Johnson or J3PO.

 

I wouldn't complain, that's for sure.

 

I think it's a given that at least 2 of the above 3 will get a Take 5 and put up a vid of it on YT.

 

No offense intended of course to the mystery employee that Dave forced to record the demos.

 

I should have known. Of course J3PO already has one, and even contributed factory presets. He might even be the reason that guy hates the factory preset demos

 

https://www.instagram.com/p/CS7ZVbQJysu/?utm_medium=copy_link

[CyberGene]

I'm wondering, those guys that complain about "suitable for funk", what music do they play on a purely analog synth then? There are way too many (around 1 million and 1 billion) demos on YouTube that will demonstrate filter opening and closing with resonance on an oscilloscope and call it a day.

[Theo Verelst]

The kind of sound in the demo is modernist sh*t I wouldn't buy a synthesizer for. Calling that funk is an insult to real players with skills and a proper sound.

 

T

[nadroj]

The kind of sound in the demo is modernist sh*t I wouldn't buy a synthesizer for. Calling that funk is an insult to real players with skills and a proper sound.

 

T

 

Looking forward to hearing your own funk demos, Theo.

[GovernorSilver]

I'm wondering, those guys that complain about "suitable for funk", what music do they play on a purely analog synth then? There are way too many (around 1 million and 1 billion) demos on YouTube that will demonstrate filter opening and closing with resonance on an oscilloscope and call it a day.

 

I'm not sure as he has not posted his own music.

 

While the funk authenticity of the official Sequential demos can be debated, his idea that only funk players will like this synth has drawn ridicule there so he seems to be keeping quiet for now.

 

He's not a native English speaker, so he might be lacking the vocabulary to criticize the music in the demos in a more articulate fashion.

[Doerfler]

[David Emm]

Its easy to coax sharp bells from ROMplers and wavetables, but is it just me, or are purely analog synths getting better at that? It makes sense that they would, since everything else has been advancing as well, but instead of losing more high-end as an aging fart, I hear more amazing nuance than ever. Prehistoric analog bell patches were novel, but generally muddy. Now the high end of keys invites snappier playing. Its one early impression I'm getting from the Take 5 demos.

[analogika]

Its easy to coax sharp bells from ROMplers and wavetables, but is it just me, or are purely analog synths getting better at that? It makes sense that they would, since everything else has been advancing as well, but instead of losing more high-end as an aging fart, I hear more amazing nuance than ever. Prehistoric analog bell patches were novel, but generally muddy. Now the high end of keys invites snappier playing. Its one early impression I'm getting from the Take 5 demos.

I think that"s more a factor of the sound aesthetic of the 1970s, coupled with tape saturation. Listen to the 80s stuff for analogue sparkle and brightness, as the taste and recording tech changed.

 

The Memorymoog can be nasty bright.

[GovernorSilver]

Its easy to coax sharp bells from ROMplers and wavetables, but is it just me, or are purely analog synths getting better at that?

 

Now I am curious as to what you think of this bell preset on the Prophet 5. This vid was uploaded 2018, so it predates Prophet 5 Rev4

 

Fast forward to 1:40 to hear the bells.

 

More percussive stuff around 4:40

 

Of course, this is without velocity sensitivity, as Prophet 5 did not have that until Rev 4. So I imagine having velocity modulate the attack and stuff like that would help make the sound sharper.

 

[video:youtube]

[Stokely]

Ok, on paper if this thing had been out when I got my Summit, I might have gotten it. 44 keys is a nice compromise between compact and being able to actually play something

 

Not that I don't love my Summit (I do) but this would have saved me a bunch (though I did get the Summit for 300 bucks off).

[lsj]

maybe it's just me but take 5 did not impress me in the least bit. nothing really different. i have the deepmind, poly d. korg minilogue xd, hydrasynth, waldorf blofeld and many other keyboards along with quite a few vst plugins namely arturia 7 and others. nothing in the demos impressed me. I am pretty sure I can get close to these sounds with what I own. what really impressed me was my korg wavestate, really different from all the synths that I own. just my two cents. the only thing that I may consider is the access virus ti2, but the cost to me is holding me back...........Larry

[GovernorSilver]

I pretty much need to try a synth in person to be impressed.

[CyberGene]

Call me greedy but I can hardly remember when I last played a chord with less than 6 notes 𤣠I"m so much used to the Herbie Hancock style m7/9/11 such as:

A E B C G D

 

And I often even play another A and B in the right hand, between the G and D, to fully thicken it on my Hydrasynth.

 

5-note polyphony totally breaks the deal for me. Why not Take-6 or even better Take 8 ð

[GovernorSilver]

For me, 5-voice polyphony is not a deterrent, especially after laying hands on a Prophet 5 for the first time.

 

Before I entered that showroom full of synths, I thought maybe Moog One will be the winner. It's the most expensive polysynth in the room - surely costing more means it's the best right?

[MikeT156]

Ok, on paper if this thing had been out when I got my Summit, I might have gotten it. 44 keys is a nice compromise between compact and being able to actually play something

 

Not that I don't love my Summit (I do) but this would have saved me a bunch (though I did get the Summit for 300 bucks off).

 

It sounds like you're not satisfied with your Summit to me. I'm sorry to hear that. I think the Summit has a lot more horse power than the new baby prophet.

 

To each his own.

 

Mike T.

[Stokely]

Ok, on paper if this thing had been out when I got my Summit, I might have gotten it. 44 keys is a nice compromise between compact and being able to actually play something

 

Not that I don't love my Summit (I do) but this would have saved me a bunch (though I did get the Summit for 300 bucks off).

 

It sounds like you're not satisfied with your Summit to me. I'm sorry to hear that. I think the Summit has a lot more horse power than the new baby prophet.

 

To each his own.

 

Mike T.

 

No, I love the Summit, but as I only use it for live gigs I didn't want to break the bank. It sounds good enough that I might start using it in songs at home, but I'm 100% in the box with software and using hardware is an inconvenience (plus my software like Repro sounds fantastic too.) Sweetwater gave me a smoking deal or I would have saved some and gone with my original choice, a rev2.

 

I am still trying to stretch out with it in my band. We are guitar-oriented covers and I normally play organ on a lot of songs, anyplace I can I'm switching to synth! (We obviously are not sticklers to play original versions thankfully). It was an impractical purchase for this band but sometimes you just gotta do it

[Mike Davis]

' ⦠It was an impractical purchase for this band but sometimes you just gotta do it. '

 

I know that feeling! I have no practical use whatsoever for a Take Five, but I want one anyway. I"m sure the feeling will pass.

[MikeT156]

Ok, on paper if this thing had been out when I got my Summit, I might have gotten it. 44 keys is a nice compromise between compact and being able to actually play something

 

Not that I don't love my Summit (I do) but this would have saved me a bunch (though I did get the Summit for 300 bucks off).

 

It sounds like you're not satisfied with your Summit to me. I'm sorry to hear that. I think the Summit has a lot more horse power than the new baby prophet.

 

To each his own.

 

Mike T.

 

No, I love the Summit, but as I only use it for live gigs I didn't want to break the bank. It sounds good enough that I might start using it in songs at home, but I'm 100% in the box with software and using hardware is an inconvenience (plus my software like Repro sounds fantastic too.) Sweetwater gave me a smoking deal or I would have saved some and gone with my original choice, a rev2.

 

I am still trying to stretch out with it in my band. We are guitar-oriented covers and I normally play organ on a lot of songs, anyplace I can I'm switching to synth! (We obviously are not sticklers to play original versions thankfully). It was an impractical purchase for this band but sometimes you just gotta do it

 

I know a local KB player in a band that plays clubs, Frat Parties and other low paying jobs where I live, I went over to listen to his band and specifically to the Rev2. As an owner of an original Prophet 5 Rev 3.2 and had previously owned Oberheims back in the day, to my ears, the Rev 2 was disappointing, From what I heard, its an inexpensive knock off that is "Not quite" worthy of the Sequential name. Based on the capability of the Summit and the sound of the Rev2 that I heard live, the Summit can eat that synth for breakfast.

 

That said, he bought what he could afford and is satisfied with it. That's what counts.

 

 

Mike T.

[David Emm]

Its easy to coax sharp bells from ROMplers and wavetables, but is it just me, or are purely analog synths getting better at that?

 

Now I am curious as to what you think of this bell preset on the Prophet 5. This vid was uploaded 2018, so it predates Prophet 5 Rev4

Fast forward to 1:40 to hear the bells.

 

Still has a soft tone to me, but your point is fair. That's the first real poly I got to play, so I retain some bias in checking the "For" box. It made me a Sequential believer. The trick then was to EQ it just short of making something shriek out at you. It was so novel that the imagined lacks meant squat. You can get nice strings from FM (and even moreso now), but its not the first place you'll usually go for them. Same with bells here, IMO, but that's not the central point of a Prophet. Its the rest that sells it so well.

 

I also see the tone debate/argument as mostly empty. People slag Roland for revisiting its history, but Sequential has the same pluses going for it in terms of its strengths. There's the Smith way and the Kakehashi-san way. That's not a competition, that's a dual WIN for players. We're in a bit of a platinum age. Widely spaced enough, four or five different synths that aren't cheating by being a Kontakt suite can handle rap or classical with ease. That does nothing to excuse the recently-housecleaned but still bulgy-feeling Wakeman-sized rig on my drive.

 

P.S. "Worse" yet, it IS a Rick-rig: Hammond organ, grand piano, clav, CS-80, Memorymoog, D-50 & Mellotron, plus nice weirdies like the LABS dulcimer. What a greybeard I is!

[GovernorSilver]

Daniel Fisher's long form demo. This time with talking.

 

The low split feature for left hand bass is cool.

 

Also, the mod matrix has a surprising 19 sources, 54 destinations - many more options than so called "big brothers" Prophet 5 and 6.

 

[video:youtube]

[Fleer]

Ordered.

[GovernorSilver]

A review - I guess this tides us over until J3PO posts his videos:

 

[video:youtube]

[GovernorSilver]

A review by Jamie Morden, a professional synth preset programmer who has done work for Moog and Novation, and has patch libraries for sale for Prophet 5 and other Sequential synths

 

[video:youtube]

[Fleer]

Pretty amazing words:

'I wasn't sure about the Sequential Take 5 when it was first announced as I already have a number of their Synths, so a 'Cut Down' version wouldn't really add anything. HOW WRONG I WAS! Take 5 is probably the best PolySynth Sequential have made. Combination of Analog VCO/VCF and the Mod Matrix is new for them and has allowed me to make Sounds that have blown me away.'

[Mark Schmieder]

Yeah, I went back and forth on this one until the GEOsynths review above.

 

Still not sure I'll get one, but I'm leaning harder towards yes, and feeling it has some unique attributes not found on other synths.

 

Thanks for the capsule above; I had missed that one distinguishing factor.

[dazzjazz]

I"m in the market for a polysynth and must admit the wait for the rumoured OB from Sequential is killing me.

I"ve checked quite a few videos for the Take 5 and I"m trying REALLY hard to like it, but it just doesn"t seem to have that essential tone I hear on the P5/10.

Is there something I"ve missed?

[GovernorSilver]

I"m in the market for a polysynth and must admit the wait for the rumoured OB from Sequential is killing me.

I"ve checked quite a few videos for the Take 5 and I"m trying REALLY hard to like it, but it just doesn"t seem to have that essential tone I hear on the P5/10.

Is there something I"ve missed?

 

A lot of people are comparing Take 5 to P5/10.

 

P5's VCOs have 2-3 simultaneous waveshapes while T5's VCOs have only 1 each, although you're provided with continuous control over the waveshape. OTOH, T5 has a real mod matrix vs. the P5/10 polymod.

 

It's interesting to see that Jamie (GeoSynth) went from "this doesn't sound as beefy as P5/P10" to "I'm in love!" after spending some time patching on it.