![]() ![]() The Moog Voyager have the very same variable wave shapes and the Grandmother (that have the same oscillators) have discrete selection of waveforms. Well, the variable wave shape option per se doesn´t defines the internals of an oscillator. triangle -> folded triangle / saw -> double saw / square -> pulse. Meanwhile, P6 have triangle, sawtooth, pulse continuous waveshaper with a separate pulse width knob and Pro 3 have a continuous x-y axis analog wavetable waveshaper i.e. may be it is somewhere between sine and sawtooth. In terms of the waveshaper, Take 5 is its kind of thing, since it have a sine, sawtooth, variable-width pulse continuous waveshaper. May be it uses synth chips like CEM3340 / SSI2130 to cut cost? No idea, those chips are very cheap these days. ![]() Yeah, from the spec, Take 5 is a VCO synth. They don't have the wave options of the P5 (not sure what these are called, the wave shapes that you select with buttons and you can have as many as you want) so I'm guessing they aren't those either - P6 has the same variable wave shape as this does so I'm guessing these are the P6 oscs. Rev 2 had DCOs, these are supposedly VCOs. ![]() Being based on the P5´s design I wonder if they used the new SSI 2040 chips or Curtis ones. I bet the oscillators are more in the Rev 2 side, but it´s the filter what will make the difference. I wonder how far the sound will be different from P5/P6/OB-6. Sequential on budget market, and it comes with the vintage knob! ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |