MATRIXSYNTH: Seekers SMS 2000 Resurfaces


Tuesday, July 18, 2006

Seekers SMS 2000 Resurfaces


Update: Pevious posts in case you missed them:
1 (original post with convention shots)
2 (the SMS2000 in plastic)
3 (the first prototype) : )

Click here for a post on the SOS forum by SteveCooperman who claims he has played with one. Here's a link to the shots saved for posterity.

Thanks goes to Dennis Verschoor for sending this one in.

The following is the full post:

"About a week ago I received a call from a friend who likes to hop from shop to shop looking for vintage gear or interesting new items. He was standing infront of a synthesiser and describing it to me on his mobile. His description intrigued me to such an extent, I decided to take the hour plus drive to see it for myself. It happened that the synthesiser just arrived that morning and wasn't there more than three hours. After playing around with it a tad, I knew I had to have it. The synthesiser is a programmable monophonic analogue by Seekers called the SMS2000. I had never heard of the manufacturer but the bloke at the shop told me they made an analogue vocoder too.

What is it? The SMS2000 reminds me quite a bit of the Minimoog Voyager. It has an adjustable knob interface like the Minimoog, a 3 1/2 octave keyboard, a crazy set of performance levers, and even a joystick. See pictures at the URLs provided below. But it seems as if Seekers wanted to one-up the Moog Voyager in almost every respect. One more oscillator, one more LFO, one more ADSR, ring modulator, fixed filter bank - like a Moog MuRF right in there but with frequencies set to those of a typical equaliser, full dual filters, and something called an XCU is also included. That's an expansion control unit which is a breakout box similar to the Moog VX-351. I don't own a modular, but it will come in handy patching into my MS-20.

I had been on the fence for some time as to whether I wanted to put out the money for a Voyager. But there always seemed to be too many little niggles and limitations with it. The Seekers seems to have overcome many of those. For example the Voyager can't invert control voltages, the Seekers can. The Voyager forces you into using the display for programming, the Seekers puts every function out there with its own knob or button. The display is only used for patch storage and retrieval, and MIDI related functions. The Seekers has a joystick on the knob interface where vertical controls one filter and the horizontal the other filter. At first I thought it a bit daft that it couldn't be patched to control all kinds of other things too, but when I considered that it seemed like an extra bonus thrown in there, and most synthesisers don't have one at all, then it seemed pretty cool.

The manual is adequate but full of typos and poor translations. Seekers is a Japanese company. There is no mention as to whether the filters are imitations of well known filters or not. Only that the 24dB/octave is a ladder filter and the 12dB/octave is a state variable. But both filters contain lowpass and highpass which can also be combined for bandpass. Both can self resonate.

I've only had the SMS for a week, and with a busy work schedule I haven't had much time to delve deeply into it yet. I'll write a more extensive review after I spend more time with it. The owner of the shop seemed to indicate these are trickling off the assembly line and it could be a couple of months before another shows up. I would expect major players like Turnkey to carry them when they begin to proliferate.

Here are some photos of the SMS. My flat is getting a bit too crowded with audio gear, so it's only a temporary setup. The MS-20 went to the floor to make room for my SMS. My Micromoog will probably be up for sale soon. I can't keep it all."

106 comments:

  1. Damn i want one!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Crap.

    Those pictures in the shop look fishey to me...

    But the ones in his home studio look ok :(

    ReplyDelete
  3. What, no sound samples?!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I didn't know Front Panel Express could turn around custom panels that quickly :)

    ReplyDelete
  5. If you zoom in on SMS2000D.jpg, look at the shadow below the keyboard. Even though the shot is in perspective, there is a completely horizontal shading line below the keys. Also, on the left of the shadow, it is black, and on the right, it seems there is at least an inch of depth -- this shadow is fake. Compare it to all the other keyboards in the pic -- it's pretty obvious.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The SMS2000 may be fake, but for sure, Cthulhu is real.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Does the guy works 24/7 on making photoshopped pics or is this real?

    ReplyDelete
  8. come on please stop giving this guy attention. this is another stupid kenneth elhart hoax just like his bahn sage. good for him, he's great with 3d and being a gear hoarder. he gets a gold star.

    ReplyDelete
  9. http://www.synthfool.com/ke.html

    Does that studio look familiar...?

    ReplyDelete
  10. i was ready to believe this until i read ken elhardt was involved. now i'm hopelessly skeptical. that dude is like a cult of personality without the cult or the personality. OOF!

    ReplyDelete
  11. I don't think its Ken at all.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Remember me ?
    I am Frédéric, the french guy in Wasquehal, in the north of France.
    I told you that the SMS 2000 is a REAL thing...
    And I was right... :-)))
    Now I just wait some samples to hear from that synth...

    Il est tout juste minuit en France. Salut à tous !

    ReplyDelete
  13. Read the post and look for any bit of information that is verifiable - like the SHOP NAME which is suspiciously omitted.

    Check out the razor-sharp areas where the black panels are composited onto the wood.

    I *do* like the manual on the counter. Nice touch.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Whenever I buy a synth, I always whip out my camera and take a few shots at the store, you know, just in case.

    Um - an hour drive from where to where again? Mr Cooperman? With a total of three posts on the same day?

    ReplyDelete
  15. I always enjoyed watching Inspector Clouseau movies. :)

    ReplyDelete
  16. I'm thinking Kenneth. Can anyone verify he has a PEK?

    White carpet.
    Similar moulding.
    TR-808.
    Micromoog.

    That, coupled with the harmony central revelation that frederic gerchambeau (who desperately wishes to convince us the product is real) hails from the same IP as Kenneth...

    There is this pervasive sense of contrivance I see in all the photos and the careful sprinkling of idiomatic expressions by the posters that all seems to spring from the same source. It all tries a little too hard.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I always enjoyed watching Inspector Clouseau movies. :)

    HI KENNETH.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Hihihi ! Hahaha ! Hohoho !
    All this story is really too much fun !
    Ok, the Bahn Sage was an happy piece of joke.
    But this story about the sms 2000 is much much more.
    No one believes shots now !
    Seekers can tell : "The SMS 2000, the synth you won't believe in even looking at it !"
    I just don't believe that a post in the SOS Forum can be a lie or a joke.

    Minuit et 36 minutes en France. Salut à tous !

    ReplyDelete
  19. One day I shall release a synth, and hire KE to market it.

    ReplyDelete
  20. OK, next time someone takes a picture (render) of the SMS2000. Take one from the back!

    Where does the power connector go? Where are the audio outputs?

    If the power connector is on the back of the keyboard, you won't be able to fully open the panel so that the back of the keyboard touches the bottom of the panel.

    If the power connector is on the back of the panel, again you won't be able to fully open the panel since the power connector will prevent this.

    And looking at the studio pics the power connector is not on top of the panel.

    I guess this is a major design/render flaw.

    ReplyDelete
  21. > I don't think its Ken at all.

    That's because it's you.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Whoever is behind this phony should have left it at the pic with the plastic covering it. That pic was amazing.

    These new ones look fake and show how badly flawed the tilt-panel design is. dvdborn has a good point, where are the jacks? Where does the power come from? Would that panel even stand up by itself? You'd need some really stiff hinges.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Look at the fourth pic:
    fourth pic
    What's with the white lines going in front of the paddles? A glitch in the rendering he didn't notice?

    ReplyDelete
  24. There's a certain rhythm to the way Ken Elhardt writes and that rhythm is also in these "evaluations."

    Seekers makes watches and antennas.

    Ken, you need to get out more often, go on a date or something.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Is it just because this synth is not the way you would have designed it ?
    It is anyway much better that the most synths are designed.
    And with its black panel, it is such a beauty !
    In fact, this synth is no such a revolution. Typical waveforms (but 4 vco...), typical filters (but 2 of them...), and so on.
    What is interesting is the way people don't believe that synth is real.
    Because that synth is real, it's obvious.
    But people just don't believe that simple truth.
    It's amazing.

    Allez, il est 1h42 en France. Je vais me coucher. A demain !

    ReplyDelete
  26. Hey Baron,
    I wish my 3D rendering skills were as good as that but unfortunaely not:

    http://www.carbon111.com/gallery2.html

    Even so...I still don't think its Kenneth. Whoever it is would have to fake the websites that were spidered by the Web Archive back in 2000

    ReplyDelete
  27. Mind you, I don't think its real anymore...

    ReplyDelete
  28. would be good to see a little video
    showing someone press some keys

    ReplyDelete
  29. frederic gerchambeau is so doing a research project.

    ReplyDelete
  30. The best way to create a false identity is to assume the life of someone who has died.

    The SMS archive from 2000 is just that. Was then. Now we have someone who has assumed its identity.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Exactly. But its not me. I don't think its Ken either...

    ReplyDelete
  32. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Nice pics... but on top of the likelyhood of anyone taking pics AT the store before buying a synth. there is the question of HOW one manages to play a synth that isn't plugged in or turned on. Then one has to wonder who would take a new synth home, set it up, turn on the Polly Evolver but leave the new synth off and take yet more pics... We even see patch cables in the expansion box - but the thing isn't on. no lights.

    ReplyDelete
  34. in fact this rendering looks great (ok, the reflections of light are a not so real looking and the design allows a nice falling on its back - beside Ken did not leave too much space for virtual electronic circuits in this 3D model..

    but: the idea behind it is great.. I don't think any1 here will consider this "real".. but sound samples? again from a JP8000? ;)

    the problem with this is: you need SMD tech for turning it into a real instrument, and the keyb. should be much heavier than the panel.

    I hope ken did not consider the ppl think of this is a real hardware??
    but it is a nice moogish looking rendering.. btw: the rendering is cool: the panel is held up by a (hidden) anti-gravity system behind the desk btw: pic B has jacks, that are simply pasted (same angle)..

    anyway: I'd take years to let a rendering look like this.. ;)

    anyway, no need to find out if he has those other synths ;) this is really far from being a real synth ;) it is not possible to have this synth with such a large panel (weight!) etc..

    which software did he use for this?

    moogulator.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I'm not understanding something. It seemed clear this thing was a real physical thing from earlier pictures of it, now people are claiming it's back to a 3D rendering. That doesn't make a lot of sense. Either all would be renderings or all are real. If you build a synth you don't have fake shadows.

    I think the guy photographed it in the store because he didn't know what it was and didn't know he was going to buy it. That's my take from his story at least with his friend describing it to him. But if anything the story is more fishy than the photo which looks okay to me.

    And why did Carbon111 go from believing to disbelieving in just 6 minutes time? There is no explaination.

    I have seen this ken guys studio pics and read about other keyboards he has from his posts. I don't think he has a pek, micromoog, or nord lead. Just an 808, but everybody has those.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I don't have an 808

    ReplyDelete
  37. 6 minutes? LOL!

    At a bare minimum those pictures are heavily tampered with. Probably completely faked or one guy with a prototype perpetuating this whole thing...

    I've been rather suspicious ever since the "Roland DL-25" thing was pointed out...

    ReplyDelete
  38. Two points: (if I can play devils advocate)

    The power cords/audio could be in the back in an indented section similar to the Waldorf XT rack, and the white-ish spot on photo D makes more sense if you look at photo B as well. It looks to be the shiny metal "guard" on the toggle.

    I also remember a similar controversy right before the Andromeda came out....

    ReplyDelete
  39. There are elements of rendering - like the front panel, and there are elements of compositing the elements in Photoshop. A little from the real world, a little from a virtual world.

    Regardless, it took a good amount of time to do. I'm also guessing that the artist could not resist throwing some clues or a signature into the result somewhere.

    The photographic elements are carefully chosen to not expose enough area that someone would recognize. The trade show photos - what trade show is it? The store photos? Which store is it? If these elements were obvious, then someone could corroborate the story.

    Same thing with the stories themselves. The trail is cold. A flickr set that someone 'found' by digging around directories. Can't remember where. No one else seems to have seen it. The brand new synth shows up in a store in England. Which store? Oh, by the way, they're trickling off the assembly line, so no one else will be able to get one for months. Am I getting all this straight?

    Interestingly, both the store photos and the original trade show photos have the same degree of careful sloppiness. The same hand did both, guaranteed.

    Ken does have a Micromoog, or at least he did in the photos here:

    http://www.synthfool.com/ke.html
    (second photo, leaning against the JP-8)

    ReplyDelete
  40. That's a Multimoog, not a Micromoog. Multis are kind of rare, Micros are quite numerous. I don't think Ken would bother with something as scaled down and limited as a Micromoog from what I know of him.

    ReplyDelete
  41. One more thing.

    I was looking at a picture of a moog voyager. The knob panel on the sms2000 appears to be considerably thicker overall. I don't see a problem with electronics. Also with power supply and transformer placed in the keyboard part, heavy weight is removed from the upper part to the lower helping to counter the anti gravity thing. There still must be a support structure of some kind back there though. One picture could solve all the arguing but not many people think about pictures of the backs of their keyboards. Somebody write him and ask for a picture from the back.

    Does that ken guy have a Seekers vocoder? I don't see one in his pictures either. I don't know anybody with one of those. Find a person who does and maybe they are the guilty one.

    ReplyDelete
  42. I visit Harmony Central now and then and I didn't see anything in the sms threads that mentioned a frederic gerchambeau or that somebody else was using kens ip address. Please be specific about the topic title there so I can search for it.

    Also, where has it been shown that elhardt is involved? I'd like to read that too.

    I'm beginning to suspect a bit of truth stretching by some people just to try to prove their point.

    ReplyDelete
  43. bhaaa..
    Kenneth would never use some ones else brand name in a fake! He is to good and to well known for that!
    My digital IXY is also taking very suspisious pictures, but the again, u never know? Owner of a few past hoax synth's.

    ReplyDelete
  44. As far as hoaxes go, it'd be better if it was something that would generate more interest than a souped up Voyager. Even if this was real, how many people would buy it? Now if it was a modern Jupiter-8 clone, that would cause a commotion as it's the #1 thing people on VSE wish existed.

    ReplyDelete
  45. I'm keeping reading you. It's so much fun.
    Well, now some "SMS 2000 is a real thing" believers are talking. That's nice !
    Now, forces are almost equal between believers and non-believers.
    Who will win ? (www... funny...).
    I have not doubt about the answer.
    The SMS 2000 is a REAL thing.
    But, that's a fact, its look is electrifying although it's nothing really new.
    Only left-hand controllers are a bit inusual.
    Anyway, all in all, the SMS 2000 seems to be a very very very enjoyable synth to with play with.

    For the "frederic gerchambeau" non-believers, it's easy to do a search with my name in Google and see... :-)))

    Il est 7h45 en France. Et je vais prendre maintenant mon petit-déjeuner. Un bon café au lait avec un croissant... :-)))

    ReplyDelete
  46. Isn't it interesting how people think the synth was bought in britain. Fact is at no place in the review does he state that. Sure he talks with british slang, but he could just as well be located in the usa . There are brits here too. Or perhaps he's located in japan. There maybe some brits there too. That synth could be sitting in a guitar center just down the street from one of us.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Frederic,

    For all we know, you are a past correspondent of Ken's or he solicited you.

    What I find amusing is that normally people take great exception to being accused of something, but Ken hardly does here. Weirder, he's someone that loves attention but isn't using this opportunity to flaunt anything of his "own" instead.
    Basic Ken and accomplice job.

    ReplyDelete
  48. can anyone find any rendering errors on these pictures :
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/92556096@N00/181351776/

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/92556096@N00/181351777/

    ?

    ReplyDelete
  49. You mean other than the fact there is no such thing as a Roland DL-25?

    The thing could be a badly-stained piece of pine with knobs glued on for all we know.

    There is little-to-no information about this synth except from anonymous sources lacking in detail...

    ReplyDelete
  50. Geez people this synth is real. It does not look 3d renderd to me at all. It is a real thing as far as I can see from the pics. Though I agree that it looks odd on how it is able to stay up like that. It looks like it should fall over. Who knows. Maybe the keyboard part is really heavy and something is holding the top part up. Whatever, it looks dam nice and I would like to hear what it sounds like.

    ReplyDelete
  51. This looks fake to me:

    http://carbon111.com/photos/sms2000b.jpg

    ReplyDelete
  52. Sorry once again, I do not know ken.
    But he must be an interesting guy to know.
    I am only a french synth-lover.
    I have a MS-20, two Yamaha SY-77, an EMU Proteus 2000 and some others little things.
    I've done also a poetry site named "Il n'est jamais trop d'Art..."

    Anyway, it doesn't matter. I'm no one important.

    A tout à l'heure peut-être... :-)))

    ReplyDelete
  53. there's something strange: the control panel seems to be too heavy and bigger than the keyboard; how it is possible to lie straight, without falling on the back? -pulker-

    ReplyDelete
  54. Its obvious fake, how the f*ck does an sms2000 stand upright?

    ReplyDelete
  55. How far would you go if you were the creator of this non existant synth that draws this much attention?

    I would continue this charade until all the major music magazines (SOS, Keyboards, ...) in the world published a picture of the SMS2000 and perhaps even assumed it's a real synth.

    I guess it will take a while before we know who's behind all this. And I'm assuming it's more than 1 person.

    BTW, I don't think the synth casing is a render, the panel on the other hand is.

    ReplyDelete
  56. BTW, I don't think the synth casing is a render, the panel on the other hand is.

    I agree with this.

    Other bits of tampering in photos are to adjust the vintage of the photographs themselves. If we want people to believe this is recent, a stack of D-550s is turned into DL-25. and a Roland SH is added into the picture.

    Other than frederic gerchambeau, who is obviously a shill, I don't think there are many people who believe this is a real product.

    Photos and forum posts without any verifiable connection to a real person or store or trade show do not count as evidence.

    And frederic, when you first popped up, yes, a google search was the first thing I did. You're not fooling anyone, sorry.

    ReplyDelete
  57. No, it's a complete mistake. Once again, I don't know Ken. But I would like !
    As I would like be a friend of Kevin Lightner (may be he knows by now the truth - fake or real ? - about the SMS 2000...) or Doktor Future.
    And it's a kind of fun for me to be taken for a Ken's friend.
    Because I write from France and you all are USA people, 5000 or 6000 miles away from me, not forgetting a 9 hours difference.
    Really, stop talking about me. I don't worth it. Unless you talk about my (french language) poetry.
    Why not anyway ? This is a synth site and you're only talking render concerning the SMS 2000. Kevin ! Kevin ! Please !
    What is the real truth about that synth ?

    http://perso.orange.fr/frederic.gerchambeau/poeme367.htm

    S'envoler pour Ailleurs
    Ou bien pour Nullepart,
    Etre un peu trop rêveur
    Ou juste goguenard,

    Voici le vrai bonheur,
    La vie en bonne part,
    Tant pis pour les râleurs
    Et leurs frères, les geignards,

    Moi je suis un fêteur,
    C'est ma joie, c'est mon art,
    Etre heureux à toute heure,
    Maintenant, sans retard.

    Ecoutez, ô pleureurs,
    Brouteurs de cauchemars,
    Regoûtez aux couleurs
    De la vie superstar.

    S'envoler pour Ailleurs
    Ou bien pour Nullepart,
    C'est juste ouvrir son coeur
    Et sourire au Hasard...

    ReplyDelete
  58. Frederic, are you sure you're from France?
    French people don't use miles. They use 'kilomètres'.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Frederic is oh so French. Didn't you read? He drinks cafe au lait and eats croissants for breakfast! ;)

    ReplyDelete
  60. Tu as raison... sorry, I meant you're right. French people do not use miles, unless to measure distance on the oceans. But we write it "milles". A "mille" is 1852 meters.
    Donc... sorry again, I meant therefore, I am at 7000 or 8000 kilometers away from you.
    But I've been once in USA ! I was 14. My aunt (well, one of them) lived (she is in heaven now) in Brighton, a very small town near by St Louis. So my 1974's summer was for me an all american one.
    Now I'm 45... A présent, j'ai 45 ans. Comme le temps passe...

    Kevin ? Did you read me ?
    Please tell us the truth about the SMS 2000...

    ReplyDelete
  61. He's had it for a week, but the pots are in the same position as they were in the shop...COME ON! If I had that thing, I'd be spinning those dials like I was on the Price Is Right!

    ReplyDelete
  62. Japanese companies are famous for building synths out of hand-finished wood cabinets.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Guys, I just played with a demo model SMS-2000. The best part... It plays Buchla mp3 samples!

    ReplyDelete
  64. a few things:

    "I would continue this charade until all the major music magazines (SOS, Keyboards, ...) in the world published a picture of the SMS2000 and perhaps even assumed it's a real synth."

    No magazine will report on this as fact because they will appear foolish when the joke is revealed. Almost as foolish as the bloggers who are giving it attention. But i guess it keeps traffic coming to matrixsynth, so it's working out for him.


    http://search.retrosynth.com/ah/search/lookit.cgi?-v0005.689

    http://search.retrosynth.com/ah/search/lookit.cgi?-v0005.931

    ReplyDelete
  65. Nice. Ken used "Steve Cooper" as an alias to defend the Sage, and we have "Steve Cooperman" buying a SMS2000.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Reed! You're Right! This must be a Buchla inspired design vs. a moog inspired design -- for there are no MP3's!

    ReplyDelete
  67. If only people would hold the Emperorship of G.W. Bush to similar scrutiny.

    (yay Canada!) (BTW. Canada Exists, in a ... strange sort of way).

    ReplyDelete
  68. One thing no one seems to have commented on is the poor design.
    The piano hinge would have to bring the panel up.So to pack it up it would have to lay flat and extend the synth.
    Ok,fits in a large flat case..er...supplied.

    But hey if you are not careful the panel might flip over and smash into the fantastic
    flippers.Nasty scratches at least.
    A proper design would surely incorporate a
    either a rest to stop that happening or would sink the paddles into a hole so it didn't happen.
    There appears to be no brake otherwise on the hinge...

    Might still exist but mechanical design seems substandard

    ReplyDelete
  69. To the Anonymous poster who commented on me putting this post up. This blog is about everything synth. If you don't think this post qualifies, this one's for you.

    ReplyDelete
  70. stretta said...
    "Nice. Ken used "Steve Cooper" as an alias to defend the Sage, and we have "Steve Cooperman" buying a SMS2000."

    Crap. Maybe it is Ken.

    ReplyDelete
  71. If only people would hold the Emperorship of G.W. Bush to similar scrutiny.

    It is interesting you mention Bush. Now, please understand that I firmly believe he is the worst president we've ever seen. However, when I saw that forged 'CYA' memo, as soon as I saw it, I knew it was fake. I wanted it to be real, but I knew it was fake. Furthermore, I could not understand how anyone else could believe it to be genuine.

    Anyway, the SMS2000 pegged my BS-detector as soon as I saw it. The last time I felt that way was when I saw that Bush memo.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Is this the most replys ever for a Matrixsynth entry?

    ReplyDelete
  73. I think Ken's motivation for these things is not to start a debate over if it is real or not, but to provoke discussion and speculation of a synth of his design.

    The SMS2000 hoax seemed designed to target the analogue heaven mail list, but discussion was pretty much shut down and nobody seems to be buying it, either.

    Anyway, it is over. I'm sure Ken is preparing his web pages about the SMS2000 project, how he did it, and so on. Also, he's disappointed no one correctly identified it as a fake from the clues he planted.

    ReplyDelete
  74. ok guys, let's be organized.
    So let's consider only ONE pic.

    The one where the SMS 2000 is in its plastic pack.

    What is fake in that very one shot ?
    Is the plastic pack fake ?
    Is the part of the synth under the plastic pack fake ?
    Is the part of the synth out of the plastic pack fake ?
    Is everything just in that very one shot fake ?

    Let's be serious, guy !
    That synth is just real and pretty desirable.

    Or tell me (or us) exactly what is fake and how it can be done.

    Un grand bonjour de Wasquehal, dans le nord de la France, à 7000 ou 8000 kilomètres de vous tous...

    ReplyDelete
  75. Frederic
    You're asking me about the truth about this synth??
    Why?
    I think it's a fake.
    That's the truth to me.

    ReplyDelete
  76. I said it before, and I'll say it again. The only way you can fool someone after the Sage would be with a "real" fake meaning not just rendered. I do think the hardware is real in some of these shots, but... Is it a functional synth and does it work, or is it a fake? I have no idea but it just seems there would be more info out there if it were actually real. Time will tell. If it's fake the big question will be which hoax was best, the Sage or the SMS 2000. As for Elhardt being behind this one, part of me really hopes so. It would be pretty brilliant if he did this to us twice. Remember there are more important things in life, so just have fun with this. You have to admit this is pretty entertaining. : )

    And yep, this post has had the most comments out of any Matrixsynth post.

    As for Kevin Lightner's thoughts, check out his comments in this post. In short, "The logistics don't add up for me here. I'd say this is a hoax by someone that is single, doesn't interact a lot with people, and prefers order instead of chance. My 2 cents of armchair psychology." : )

    ReplyDelete
  77. It looks fake to me. The counter ones look 'shopped, it just seems 'wrong'.

    First time I saw this, I thought the wood case looked a little home made to be a professional product, and it *certainly* has nary the slightest whiff of Japanese design, if it's supposed to.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Elhardt here. I just read through all the posts and about 95% of it is completely false. I have to be the voice of reason and logic it seems.

    First of all I hadn't commented here yet because I didn't know so much was going on here. I want to correct all those false statements made and point out all the contradictions people are creating.

    I was not defending the SMS synth anywhere as claimed. Being into 3D rendering and image processing I can quite easily determine what is a photo and what is rendered. In fact there is something that can be done in seconds to determine if an image has be touched up. I was stating that what people were seeing was a real physical object, not a rendering. I still concluded that it could still be a hoax, just not a rendered one. In fact, after that crappy ebay looking sms photo showed up, that should have put to rest any talk about 3d rendering, airbrushing, fake panels, photoshopped shadows and so forth. The problem is people who know nothing about rendering or photo retouching, nor what is involved, are saying things that can't be true. 3D Rendering is mathematically perfect, it doesn't put further away objects infront of closer ones. It is far easier to put a piece of foam board in a wood frame and photo it than to composite a computer image and try to match computer lighting to a real scene. And the list of bizarre claims seems to go on and on. If you want to get to the bottom of all of this, finding real problems is what's needed, not making up fake ones. As an observer I can point out many of those false claims.

    I don't know the french guy, yet I can see by his posts why it might look that way. There is no relation. I've searched the Harmony Central forum, and he wasn't mentioned there as somebody here claimed. His IP address better not be mine.

    I don't own a PEK, Nord Keyboard anything, Micromoog, or Seekers vocoder. With the exception of the Micromoog, I have never seen in person or touched any of those other products. And I use Ultimate Support A-frame stands for my keyboards which can hold big, heavy and deep synths.

    You think I haven't examined these images, even up close zoomed in many times? Guess what, the synth is really there, the shadows and reflections are fine. The mic cables are real. The vocoder is not floating over the table. There doesn't appear to be anything wrong with the shading on the hand. The depth of field focus and low light settings are not wrong. The shadows on the knobs aren't fake. The panel isn't composited because somebody can tell by the edges. And so on. This is easy to tell by examining the images and camera CCD mosiac patterns in them, and whether they are consistant or even exist at all.

    Taking a picture of a synth that's turned off doesn't make it fake. There are a couple of pictures where it's turned on, remember? Putting knobs in the same position, where if I can read the labels correctly, it would be the off position which would be normal, doesn't mean a fake synth. The knobs (and sliders) are in different positions in the first booth shot than they are in the second two, remember? What I'm seeing now is such paranoid talk to the point where it contradicts earlier pictures.

    Namm badges show the word NAMM on them, and Musik Messe probably do too. Just from the badge it is clear the booth was not at any of those shows. And with japanese writing on the posters, datasheets, and even Kirikax's badge, it must be a Japanese show, if anything. Also, I don't know why people expect there to be some big fanfare for the release of this synth. There was no such thing for the Cwejman, or M5. In fact if I wasn't a member of some of these synth forums, I won't even know that Synthesizers.com existed. No mention of them has shown up in any magazine I get since they came onto the scene. Completely invisible. Seekers is not Roland or Yamaha.

    Here are the things I find possibly out of place. In the first booth picture with the people I only see two suspicious things. His face and the posters on the wall. However as other images appeared, those things then made sense. The gakki.com poster is obviously really shiney as seen in one of the booth shots, but it looks flat in the first one. It appears somebody pasted images over the posters probably to get rid of the shine so they could be read. That also may explain the face. In hollywood you put makeup on so a person's face doesn't look oily, shiney or wet. Looks like somebody tried to matt it down. Everything else looks fine. Nothing really all that odd afterall.

    The shot with all the boxes was tampered with. In fact, that might be the only good piece of evidence I've seen yet. But what does modifying a box have to do with the synth which we already know is a real physical object? Probably nothing. Obviously it would be far easier to do nothing with the boxes and leave them in there original state, rather than change just a few, even to a possible part number than doesn't exist. That extra work seems so counterproductive as to make no sense at all. You don't try to prove a synth is real by making boxes fake. Changing some boxes into brand new products to prove some other point might make sense. Tampering with the sms is bad. Tampering with boxes is odd, but seems somehow unrelated to the synth.

    I have pointed out to some people, that there is no problem with a synth standing up, because there is obviously some kind of support or mechanism to hold it up and possibly keeping it from moving beyond a certain point. Geez. I can't believe people are unaware of a Minimoog or Voyager. It too has the same kind of hinge mechanism from what I've seen in pictures, but there is something back there to hold the panel up or keep it from folding forward down onto the modwheels. I find it very odd that people can't figure that out. As I've pointed out to two other people, it's standing up in every picture, so there must be something there. Hell, maybe even a stick or a brick, but there must be something. This is a good example of people not reading other posts.

    I don't see much relation between the first images and the last ones. The first ones are all 1024 pixels across and since most of what I've seen on flickr seems limited to that size, I think they must scale everything down, so they might be bigger still. The black panel sms images are all 800x600 or smaller. Lower res camera maybe. There was photoshop tampering in the first images, but no odd posters or painted faces nor anything else appears tampered with in the later ones.

    That steve cooperman name is weird. And that's why I was hesitant to reveal any alias I might have used as anybody can hide behind it. In fact they could use my real name just to mess with me. Or they could hide behind a Kirikax badge too.

    Now I'm not writing any of this to defend the sms. It could be real, it could be somebody elses hoax, or it could even be my hoax. Maybe as somebody said, a piece of proof as to the creator was left somewhere. Maybe the knobs on the synth are arranged to spell out a name or there is the reflection of the creator's face somewhere. I left no clues in the Sage though. So you could search, but possibly waste time doing so. But if anybody finds that conclusive proof, you'd go down as the solver of the SMS2000 hoax, if it is one.

    So most of what people are saying is nonsense. If you think about things, there are many simple explanations for things people are paranoid about. And I just have to say, with these latest pictures we now have a synth with a different panel, buttons, performance panel, and wood grain pattern. As somebody else said, there's two of them now. That's what makes it difficult for me to comprehend. A hoaxer with a factory in his house is going to start pumping out a bunch of them. But who knows. I guess anything is possible in the minds of the sceptics.

    Okay, talk amongst yourselves.

    ReplyDelete
  79. I've just read what Ken has written.
    He said what I think about the SMS 2000 shots in matter of pixels.
    But I can add something.
    Now there is two things to explain as a hoax, if they are both a hoax.
    The SMS 2000 itself. And the "patch-box" joined to that synth.
    Anyway, again, the SMS is too well thought to be a hoax.
    For a hoax, it would be simplier to emulate a nice synth with nice known functions.
    Here, with the SMS, almost everything has a new design.
    Left-hand controllers, filter bank, modulation connectors and so on.
    Not forgetting the "patch-box" design.
    No, this can't be a hoax in matter of pixels.
    And are these things real things but just not functional objects ?
    It would be even a hardier work to do to make these things real but not functional.
    So, my deep feeling is that these things are for real and for great playing pleasure...

    Kevin, I've sent emails to Mr Kirikax and to Seekers Co about the SMS 2000.
    I've no answer yet.
    May be can you be more effective than me in that sort of things.
    But I ask anyone in fact.

    Bonjour à tous !

    ReplyDelete
  80. Definitely Ken and there is no Mr Kirikax.

    ReplyDelete
  81. The Moog Little Phatty had a teaser marking build-up which culminated with the release of the full photos of the unit. Without hearing or touching the synth, the vivisection commenced immediately. Debates on the usability and feature set of the synth were batted around ad nauseam.

    I believe the author of the hoax wanted to instigate the same sort of response from the synth community - but the joke would be on them - it doesn't exist, see?

    Instead of a discussion of the feature set, we get a discussion of the hoax. So, a second round of photos pop up from another untraceable source, but this time, a sort of product review is included for those not willing to squint at the legending on the first shot of the front panel. The primary features were sort of laid out in text for us to discuss.

    Yet, more hoax discussion ensued. The strangest part, for me, was the numerous Moog-baiting including the troll line, "But it seems as if Seekers wanted to one-up the Moog Voyager in almost every respect."

    OK, normally, that would cause a firestorm of comments. A guaranteed debate-starter. The response: YAWN. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY took the bait.

    Anyway, that was the intent of this whole thing, IMO, and it failed.

    ReplyDelete
  82. Before anyone believes a word of Ken's comments, re-read this post before he revealed himself to be the perpetrator of the Sage hoax.

    http://search.retrosynth.com/ah/search/lookit.cgi?-v0005.689

    His comments have ZERO weight until the person who did the hoax is unveiled.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Boy, the more I look at it, I feel it's one damn ugly and ungainly synth.

    I'm over the SMS2000. Bad design.

    ReplyDelete
  84. "Before anyone believes a word of Ken's comments, re-read this post before he revealed himself to be the perpetrator of the Sage hoax.

    http://search.retrosynth.com/ah/search/lookit.cgi?-v0005.689
    "

    I second this. Knowledgeable or not, he really has no credibility.

    ReplyDelete
  85. If I inspect the images with QuickTime property inspector, all eight images (the four original and new four) were all written by Adobe Photoshop 5.0. And, all eight images have exactly the same RGB profiles.

    If I compare these properties to some recent images known to have originated by Kenneth - they don't match at all.

    Either he is taking extreme care to cover his tracks, or Ken is not responsible.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Doh. Wait a minute. The SMS_Touched_Up.jpg photo known to be from Kenneth was also written by Photoshop 5.0.

    ReplyDelete
  87. ...and same RGB profile.

    boom. game over.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Is the RGB profile shared accross all images? Is it the equivalent of a fingerprint? If so, you might actually be the person to have solved this one. : )

    ReplyDelete
  89. That's no proof. When you edit a photo, like the original SMS photos in Photoshop, and you save it. You can save it with its original properties. Meaning the same RGB-profile.

    ReplyDelete
  90. Is the RGB profile shared across all images? Is it the equivalent of a fingerprint?

    Well, we have eight pictures that supposedly come from two different sources. It would be odd that all of them are created with Photoshop 5.0 - software that was current in 1999.

    Another coincidence is they share all share identical RGB profiles.

    This unlikely combination of factors leads me to believe they came from the same source.

    The kicker, though, is a recent image, known to be created by Kenneth, a 'third' source, also shares this odd combination of attributes.

    What are the odds that all three sources, which should have nothing to do with each other, were all created with Photoshop 5.0 and the same RGB profile?

    ReplyDelete
  91. Is that fake ???

    http://www.keyboardmuseum.org/ar/s/seek/umc.html

    Obviously not...

    Seekers exists and they have products...

    So why being suspicious about a synth from that company ?

    ReplyDelete
  92. I just got an email from Matrix. Now I read more contratictions.

    Somebody else posted on AH a couple of weeks ago that the images on flickr had no EXIF data

    Jan-Ahrent Czmok wrote:
    "By analyzing the pictures with my tools, i see no EXIF data, so those files are either done with a VERY old camera or scanned."

    Then other photos he claimed don't match so it's not me. So then how did my profile change?

    Then one photo I did matches something else and then it is me again.

    Geez. I've never messed with the RGB profile which is probably set to default, like a million other people. Just looked, there are nine posibilies. I'm at 6500. Standard for anybody who doesn't want a blue tinted or yellow tinted screen. Don't see why that's unusual or would change in other images of mine unless modifiing somebody elses image like I did in the Touched Up keeps it's own profile.

    I just posted a picture to Harmony Central showing the Voyager is Fake. What's that profile?

    As for Matrixsynths question, as far as I can tell it's going to be the same for most people but some will change it if their monitor doesn't look right. Hardly a fingerprint. More like somebody claiming that if more than one person uses Photoshop 5 they're both the same person.

    This then contradicts everything seen in the images I don't own. How is that explained. Everything has to all of a sudden pop into place. Not one thing that only raise more questions about other things.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Oh, and that goofy thing that made you say I have no credibility, of course I did the Sage hoax, and of course I'm not going to come online and say I did it in the middle of it actually running. It's like saying a magician has no credibily because he performed a magic trick and confused people. I posted that because actually having done the hoax I knew all the false statements others were saying about it, so I came into the conversation as if I too were a 3rd party to explain them away. You want to see no credibility then you should have seen all the false things people were saying about photographic portion of the image. I corrected their false statements.

    ReplyDelete
  94. In fact, all this story is very simple.
    Sky Soundlab made the Voice Spectra.
    Later, Sky Soundlab changed its name for Seekers.
    Seekers made the UMC 1688.
    This company has now the necessary knowledge to make a synth.
    The first try is the SMS 1000. But it failed to be a successful project.
    But they learned from that failure.
    The second project is the SMS 2000. Which seems to have in something from the Voice Spectra.
    Now they try to market their SMS 2000.
    And that is the all story.

    I think there is much paranoia involved in the refusal of the reality of the SMS 2000.
    Too good to be true ?
    Not only.
    Ken has done a very fake jokeful Bahn Sage.
    So what ?
    Every synths are from now on fakes ???

    Let's be serious.
    I've no doubt that time will tell that the SMS 2000 is a reality.
    So let's be cool.
    And let's wait.

    ReplyDelete
  95. I just posted a picture to Harmony Central showing the Voyager is Fake. What's that profile?

    Those were the first ones I tested, and when they did not match, I became despondent, and began to have my doubts. I tried one last image, SMS_Touched_Up.jpg, bingo, it matched.

    I don't know what you do for a living, Kenneth, but the image attributes I modify at home do not match the ones I do at work. I'm guessing you use an older version of photoshop at home, but the touched up voyager photos you did at work. Those are consistent with a newer version of Photoshop. I don't know if you did them at home or work, but I believe they were done on a different computer.

    Come on man. Give up. It is over. I'm sorry no one pegged at as a fake based on whatever arbitrary criteria you have deemed acceptable, (which is why I made that Young Frankenstein-inspired touch-up), but it is done. No one believes this is a real product.

    ReplyDelete
  96. You know, there has been some damning evidence, and I grant you, you did a very good job. But you know why this is frustrating. I'm willing to bet that if I did a hoax I would want to do some things that kind of rubbed people's faces in it. Make them look kind of like fools when the jig was up. And it's like I'm seeing people almost get there but not quite. I believe there is a slight posibility that my name has been on this thing since day one, sitting one inch infront of everybody's faces, and yet they can't see it. One puzzle that deciphers into the name Ken Elhardt. Boy do I wish somebody could find that because I'd like to go to bed.

    ReplyDelete
  97. Just a side note, this is not SMS2000 related really, but I wanted to thank Carbon111 for lending me his PEK. It looked great on my stand under my Micromoog. It's a nice machine. Maybe I'll buy my own some day. Thanks again.

    ReplyDelete
  98. Ken, I don't know, you know that. But I would like to say I admire you. You almost keep cool being harassed here. That's nice. And your hoax was a great work. Only a great man can do a great work. Now you suffer about it beacause people see an hoax everywhere by now. You're a bit responsible for that. But enough is enough. You've done one hoax, once, and that's it. So, I tell you, even if I am no one to you, I admire you. You're great, Ken. Although I love every one...

    Now, who will answer my last post ?

    "In fact, all this story is very simple.
    Sky Soundlab made the Voice Spectra.
    Later, Sky Soundlab changed its name for Seekers.
    Seekers made the UMC 1688.
    This company has now the necessary knowledge to make a synth.
    The first try is the SMS 1000. It failed to be a successful project.
    But they learned from that failure.
    The second project is the SMS 2000. Which seems to have in something from the Voice Spectra.
    Now they try to market their SMS 2000.
    And that is the all story.

    I think there is much paranoia involved in the refusal of the reality of the SMS 2000.
    Too good to be true ?
    Not only.
    Ken has done a very fake jokeful Bahn Sage.
    So what ?
    Every synths are from now on fakes ???
    "

    ReplyDelete
  99. BTW, didn't anyone else noticed how in these new pictures the 'Mod Whl Calibration' button is gone.

    I remember someone saying, when they analysed the first pictures: 'What Mod wheel?'.
    And now it's gone...

    ReplyDelete
  100. That's well observed.
    The SMS is still in evolution...

    ReplyDelete
  101. I like the ring around Ke in the Seekers logo.

    ReplyDelete
  102. Wrong... That ring is around "EKE"...
    Maybe it would be nice not to see KEn everywhere...

    What is more interesting is that there is in fact two models of SMS 2000. Well, at least two.
    It was the same for the Minimoog. Four models, A to D. D was the good one.

    Here, with the SMS 2000, which is A, which is B ?
    I guess the one with the black front-panel is A. No mod-wheel.
    And the one with the white front-panel is B. Incidentally, it was the one showed by Mr Kirikax. So, yes, it must be the last one to be produced, and so it must be the B.

    ReplyDelete
  103. Well, the black version is supposed to be the version picked up in a shop so it would have to be the latest version. The mod wheel is missing in one of the white shots, but not the other. Check out the big shots on this SYNTHWIRE post. In the first shot you can see three levers, the right one presumably the "mod wheel." In the second shot it's gone. The EKE could stand for, Elhardt, Kenneth, but whatever. BTW, I hope no one is actually getting worked up by this. Enjoy the entertainment while it last.

    What would be the ultimate hoax would be if this were actually a real synth and it was from... Elhardt! : P

    As for Elhardt getting any more attention on this one. One, if it is his hoax, everyone will say "I told you so." If Elhardt is not involved then someone else will get the limelight. If it's real then... it's real. If it's real and Elhardt's, then Elhardt definitely deserves the last laugh. As for any of us trying to find the "clue" that gives it away, and lets Elhardt rub our noses in it. Give me a break, who really cares? Now if you are into puzzle solving then have fun with it. BTW, if frederic is not Elhardt or involved with Elhardt, maybe this is his hoax.

    Hopefully we'll get our answer before it becomes boring. Everything has it's lifespan and this one might be reaching the end of it if something new doesn't show up soon. Hoaxter/s, you better get cracking. You're audience is beginning to get bored.

    ReplyDelete
  104. "Elhardt said...
    Just a side note, this is not SMS2000 related really, but I wanted to thank Carbon111 for lending me his PEK. It looked great on my stand under my Micromoog. It's a nice machine. Maybe I'll buy my own some day. Thanks again."

    http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k77/stevecooperman/SMS2000D.jpg

    "I would want to do some things that kind of rubbed people's faces in it. Make them look kind of like fools when the jig was up."

    try leaving the house a bit more. you know, socialize, make some friends, turn off the computer...

    ReplyDelete
  105. Disregard my last comment on the mod wheel not showing up in one of the white shots. It's there, just wasn't looking hard enough. It's the mod calibration knob that's missing in the new shots of the black version. You can clearly see only one knob, while the shots of the white version had two.

    ReplyDelete

To reduce spam, comments for posts older than one week are not displayed until approved, usually same day. Do not insult people. For items for sale, do not ask if it is still available. Check the auction link and search for the item. Auctions are from various sellers and expire over time. Posts remain for the pics and historical purposes. This site is meant to be a daily snapshot of some of what was out there in the world of synths.

PREVIOUS PAGE NEXT PAGE HOME


Patch n Tweak
Switched On Make Synthesizer Evolution Vintage Synthesizers Creating Sound Fundlementals of Synthesizer Programming Kraftwerk

© Matrixsynth - All posts are presented here for informative, historical and educative purposes as applicable within fair use.
MATRIXSYNTH is supported by affiliate links that use cookies to track clickthroughs and sales. See the privacy policy for details.
MATRIXSYNTH - EVERYTHING SYNTH