|Synth Site: SCI: Prophet 600 Synthesizer: User reviews Add review|
|Average rating: 4.0 out of 5|
|page 5 of 9: <<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >>>|
|Shane Wood a part-time user from USA writes:|
Well, let me start off by saying that the dual-sequencer is pretty nice, other than that... this synth isn't much. It is beautifully designed with nice walnut wooden ends and a nice layout as far as pots go. Capable of fat-deep bass if you tweek the cutoff to the right spot (but you see, the pots are digitally controlled which kills the synth)and the filter sweeps are cool. Not a lead, not worth more than $150 US. The sound is high and thin, the membrane keypad is crap, however the keys are better the the Pro-1 design. Like I said, good for effects and not much else. Oh, the arppegiator is lacking.
|Rating: 1 out of 5 posted Friday-Dec-15-2000 at 15:15|
|Obnosis a part-time user from Italy writes:|
Nothing more of others as a rewiew,I have exchanged my Jupiter6 with a new Prophet600 of a friend,to my ears and for my personal taste it sounds better on many type of sounds and has many more power in analogs modulation effects,with that American particular character that I prefer against many Japan polysynth. Sure it's name is not so of fashion as Roland.... I have also some banks on tape...
|Rating: 4 out of 5 posted Saturday-Sep-30-2000 at 05:26|
|Paul Nicholls a hobbyist user from UK writes:|
I had one of these synths years ago...
This synth is basically a cut-down midi-ed version of the Prophet-5. In fact, I believe this was the first synth to include midi.
It sounded rubbish, until you gave it half an hour to warm up. And not much better after that! There were only three sounds I could get that were any good, and one of those was useless!
Although this was my initial impression of the synth, things changed when a friend of mine lent me his effects unit...
You see that although the sounds are hard, they are also pure. Which means that you can warm up the sounds without messing them up. In fact you get a much better improvement to the sound than if you put a Cheetah MS6 through the same effects unit! Having said that, I think the MS6 sounds better when the machines are in the raw. Apart from synth strings that is. The strings on the P-600 are warmer than a builders buttock crevice!
At the end of the day, there just weren't enough features on this synth to keep me happy. This, coupled with the tuning problems mentioned earlier, led me to sell it a year after purchase.
If you decide to buy one, try to find one with the latest midi spec. Also if you have access to a Commodore Amiga with a midi interface and a P-600 with good enough midi spec, I still have quite a few sounds for it (including that string patch). If you want them, get in touch!
|Rating: 4 out of 5 posted Thursday-Jul-06-2000 at 18:35|
|Hopper a professional user from USA writes:|
I just Picked a the prophet 600 and I love may things about it. The emulations of acoustic instruments are noticably phony but If you want to create a growling sub bass, a cheezy chumpy lead sound Its The Bomb. I super love this synth. I personally feel the user interface is GRRREAT and thre knobs are big phat and Ugly. Its light, (compared to my DX-7, XP-80) but it does not feel like a toy (JP-8000) The only thing I really don't like is the stepping of the Oscillators and Filter BUT, I find Cool ways to utilize this stepping effect to create fun sounds and riffs anyways. Essentialy I love this synth. Although, I cannot wait until My Novation Supernova II Keyboard Gets here. OOOH. The Days will become years with all these awsome sounding toys in my Room! If you can find a prophet for a reasonable price, Buy it. Its a fun piece of yesterday that won't dissapoint you if you turn a knob or two! N-JOY
|Rating: 4 out of 5 posted Wednesday-May-24-2000 at 16:14|
|Doug P a hobbyist user from USA writes:|
Not much to add to the existing reviews; the Prophet 600 was my first synth (back in 1983), and is probably best compared to its competitors at the time, such as the Roland Juno 106 or the Korg PolySix. I like it more than either of those, but others will disagree.
The Prophet 600 audio signal path is 100% analog, however, the envelopes and LFO are digital (which is why they're both too slow), and the knobs are rotary encoders (digital), rather than pots (analog), which accounts for the stepping on manual filter sweeps, etc. Actually, mine currently has a scratchy rotary encoder on filter cutoff, so I get horrible (wonderful!) filter noises when I tweak the knob.
I'm glad that other reviewers have already mentioned the Poly-Mod feature, which is what (IMO) sets it above and apart from the competitors I mentioned above. With that, you can get some pretty unique "it must be analog" sounds. Despite its' CEM voice chips sounding a bit thin, I've gotten some fat bass sounds out of it by stacking all six voices in unison mode. I'd have to say that its main strengths, besides those unclassifiable analog sounds, are its strings, pads, and organ sounds.
All in all, the Prophet 600 has been an essential part of my sound for over 15 years (except for the couple after my original one got stolen and had to be replaced), and even if it isn't the *best* polyphonic analog (by any means), it's probably my personal favorite.
|Rating: 4 out of 5 posted Tuesday-Apr-25-2000 at 18:09|
|page 5 of 9: <<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >>>|