In this video, UK composer Christian Henson shares his impressions of the new Novation Summit synthesizer.
The Novation Summit, introduced at Superbooth 2019, is a new flagship synthesizer that essentially combines two of their Peak synthesizers into a knob-filled keyboard. It offers deep synthesis capabilities, a 16-voice two-part multitimbral engine and a hands-on workflow.
The Summit is based on a hybrid synth architecture that starts with their digital New Oxford Oscillators; follows that with true stereo analog signal path, with analog multimode VCFs, VCAs and three analog distortion sections; and adds powerful digital effects.
Henson describes the Summit synthesizer as ‘absolutely gorgeous’. Check out the demo and share your thoughts on it in the comments!
See the Novation site for more details.
Neat, but digital-sounding.
This is the sort of comment that just seems fundamentally ignorant to me.
The Summit is one of the most powerful and best sounding synths if its generation, and its whole reason to exist is to take things that really are great about digital synthesis – flexible wave generation and time-based effects – and marry them with with what’s really great about analog synthesis – analog filters, analog distortion etc. And, from what I’ve seen and heard, the Summit does this better than any synth yet.
Anybody thats paying attention to what this can do, and what other company’s ‘flagship’ synths can do, understands that this is a synth that is going to be a classic. It can sound as ‘analog’ as any synth, but also has a range of timbres that no pure analog has ever had.
There are a LOT of great synths out now, from Sequential, Moog, Yamaha and others. These synths are more capable than almost all of the vintage greats, yet people seem to have no clue about how good we got it right now!
Does anyone mind the looks nowadays?
Yamaha is plastic fantastic nowadays…horrible imo…yes i care for aesthetic.
Ive both an sequential and a yamaha synth btw.
The peak summit has nice looks, like sequential has in general or moog with an sub 37 for example…for my taste.
I think manufactures deserve a compliment if they deliver good sounding synths with ALSO nice looks.
I like the looks of this and I like the looks of Yamaha’s professional synths like the Montage – not flashy but classic design.
It’s rare for manufacturers to do something ‘out there’ that is actually usable and will stand the test of time. The new Moogs manage to pull this off, though the designs are polarizing now. Butch lad make it work. It’s hard to think of many other synths that pull that off.
The Euro world, though, if full of random terrible design posing as creativity.
The Summit looks like a great synth to me. Anybody worried about it sounding ‘digital’ needs to spend an hour with this or the peak and you’ll change your tune.
The Summit really makes you see that it’s time for manufacturers to move things forward. We had the era of digital fm synth, we had the era of romplers and va synths and we’re stuck in a mode where most companies are revisiting the past. The Summit, the One, the Montage are all powerful synths for NOW.
It is multitimbral.
The comments on this blog recently have been baffling. I wonder who the hell posts so enthusiastically yet wrongly. On the FM synth post someone said “nobody wants to build a sequencer”, on a FPGA synth ? And now here we are. I mean, what can I say?
Come ON people, tense up your brains.
“The 16-voice, multitimbral engine combines two simultaneous patches. Split or stack them for keyboard-divided or layered sounds, or switch the entire synth between two separate and independently controlled setups, perhaps using one as an effects processor for an external input source.”
I mean. Come on. It’s not difficult.
On multitimbrality of this synth a lot was already written, as well as for the peak: novation here just stacked two monotimbral peaks, which achitecture seems to not allow multitimbrality implementation.
This is to me a just a “brute force” approach to achieve a pseudo multitimbral synth.
the regret is the incredible waste of vpices to obtain just two timbres at a time, whic is good for a peformance synth, but very limited for a studio synth.
“This is to me a just a “brute force” approach ” What? What exactly are you expecting from this? What is a “pseudo multitimbral synth”?
pseudo multitimbral synth because they just put two monotimbral 8 voice synths in one box. The synth architecture is still monotimbral, you just have two different synths. A brute force approach is when to achieve something instead to find a different and more appropriate solution you just do the same thing “harder”, if one man is not strong enough to move a rock, instead to develop the wheel, you just use ten men.
the original peak had just one big limit to me: 8 voices but just one part multitimbral. I admit that I was very upset with this, because I love the synth and that thing stopped me to buy. they choose to make a bigger keyboard version and choose to go with the same architecture.
the market will decide.
I must admit, I must not be an expert on multitimbrality in synths. How is it achieved on other polysynths with analog signal paths if not for stacking two identical layers on one another (or with a keyboard split, which the Summit also does)? And how many synths with analog signal paths offer more than 2 layer stacks?
my old sequential multitrack have 6 voices and is six part multitimbral, plus have 6 independent outputs not counting the normal stereo output. and is completely analog and cem based.
my esq1, with digital oscillators and analog filters (which may be considered similar architecture with peak, obvioulsly 30 years older) have 6 voices and is 6 part multitimbral with sequencer and dynamic assignment of the voices….
all these machines where cheap alternatives to other “flagship” synths of that era.
my jupiter 8 have 8 voices and is just 2 part multitimbral, still better than the novation, and is going to be 40 years old next year.
make multitimbral analog polysynths is perfectly possible.
I like very much the peak and consider it a very interesting machine, an instant buy if implements deeper multitimbrality. I would prefer 8 voices 8 part multitimbral with at least 4 outs than 16 voices two part multitimbral.
The Sequential Multitrack also sounds like ass compared to just about any modern synth – hard to keep really in tune, steppy controls and thin sounding to boot.
Don’t spout misinformation on the internet – actually learn what you’re talking about!
The Summit IS multi-timbral, and unlike the Multitrack, actually has independent outputs, so you can treat and mix the two parts however you like.
A Jupiter 8 costs $20,000 nowadays, so if you think it’s multi-timbral operation is great, you could buy 10 Summits for the same price and have 20 much more powerful synth engines.
The sad truth about features like multi-timbral functionality, alternate tunings, polyphonic aftertouch, etc is that all the major synth makers made gear with these features to see if buyers actually wanted them, and the market said ‘No’. As a result, most of these features have been missing in action for 30 years on most synths and they’ve largely been relegated to ‘flagship’ synths and niche gear.
I know exactly what I’m talking about, and by the way the multitrak have independent outputs for each voice. The fact that the peak is a better sounding synth is irrelevant respect the argument of multitimbrality as well as the bla bla on prices. the esq which I also mentioned is an excellent sounding synth for example, and the relevant thing in the discussion is just the fact that such multitimbrality was perfectly possible something like 30 years ago. the audible steps and similar issues are surpassed by today much faster processors able to manage better resolution, not considering all the rest of the digital chain. I’m just an user who comments a product and is perfectly legitimate to express the FACT that I personally would prefer a better multitimbral implementation in such a good synth.
Sounds incredibly boring, IMO. There’s so much better out there now that is far superior for that price.
“Biggest knob on the keyboard…” Him! Just joshing, 🙂
Also isn’t this just bi-timbral? Not really a hassle if it is, coz it sounds great.
For studio use, it doesn’t matter if the synth is multi-timbral; we all have DAWs for recording. When playing live, we only have two hands, so bi-timbral functionality is perfect.
The idea that we might need eight different patches all sequenced simultaneously on the same instrument is bizarre.
Most companies aren’t making fully multitimbral synths, because that makes them complicated and most keyboardists never use multitimbral capabilities beyond splits.
If you want fully multitimbral synths, that’s a place where Elektron’s designs really shine. The Analog Four is a complete beast
“The Analog Four is a complete beast”
This!
It’s like none of the commenters have ever heard of the Analog Four or Analog Keys.
And while the Analog Four is one of my favorite synths ever – it’s not really a ‘players’ synth, like the Summit, it shines for live performance that combines sequenced parts and live parts.
I have a room with some of the best of past and present and I have ZERO problems with the sound of this synth.