|
Thats a bit disingenuous.  Even the simpler VAs like Nord Lead still have ridiculous range. You could spend 10 years programming it and think you've seen and done all that can be done with an NL2 and then someone like Jexus will come along and prove that you don't know squat.There are still people making sounds on this thing that I didn't even think were possible. Juno is much much simpler so its harder to escape the 'Juno sound' thing its got going but who cares when it sounds that awesome? Its so effortless.
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2010 08:26 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2013 03:57 |
|
|
I like my Juno-G. It's got the same engine as the Fantom series and a good catalog of classic Roland waveforms. Plus I picked it up for only $500 so it was sort of a steal
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2010 16:33 |
|
|
I have one of these that I acquired many years ago. It rules. I'm pretty keen to get a Virus TI Snow some time soon, or maybe a Desktop, depends how far the funds stretch.
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2010 02:26 |
|
|
The Virus B was my first synth ever back in 1999, and I can't think of a better synth to have started with... The instruction manual had a FANTASTIC step-by-step tutorial on the fundamentals of subtractive synthesis, all the while relating it to the specific architecture of the Virus. After taking that in, you sort of realize that most synths do 90% of the same things, just with slightly different layouts. The other 10% of what a synth does differently is rarely much of a challenge to understand. Since then, I've pretty much been able to intuitively wrap my head around any and every synth that's ended up in front of me. Hopefully they're still including that tutorial with the newer virus models.
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2010 14:55 |
|
|
snare posted:I have one of these that I acquired many years ago. It rules. I have a virus TI snow that I'd be willing to sell, I still have the original box, manuals, and everything. It's been on my desk for 2 years and has had 0 road time. I've seen them sell used on ebay for $1000, I'd let it go for $900 + shipping. Email me insolace (at) yahoo (dot) com if you're interested.
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2010 16:46 |
|
|
Also on an unrelated note, for those who use soft synths with controllers, what is the best way to lay out a controller for synth programming? I have a novation remote SL and am trying to come up with an intuitive and consistent way to lay out the basic synthesizer controls, that way no matter what soft synth I'm using I can use the same controllers to start programming the basics without having to touch my mouse. Obviously synth controls differ, but the basics should be the same, right? waveform PW osc2 detuning Osc1/2 balance Any FM controls VCA ADSR VCF ADSR Filter type Cutoff Resonance Filter AMT/ Key follow etc LFO basics I'm interested in hearing the different approaches people take to laying this out.
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2010 17:11 |
|
|
RivensBitch posted:Also on an unrelated note, for those who use soft synths with controllers, what is the best way to lay out a controller for synth programming? I have a novation remote SL and am trying to come up with an intuitive and consistent way to lay out the basic synthesizer controls, that way no matter what soft synth I'm using I can use the same controllers to start programming the basics without having to touch my mouse. Obviously synth controls differ, but the basics should be the same, right? The Remote SL just has unlabeled controllers, right? I guess you could kinda assign them to mimic the typical synth layout with the signal path going left->right across the controls (Oscillator controls on the left, then filter, the modulation and amp controls last). Really though, there's enough variance from synth to synth that nothing is going to be exactly the same from one to another. One nice thing about my X-station is that, being a synth itself, the controls come already labeled and organized for controlling a subtractive synth, so with it, it's just a matter of figuring out what the closest equivalent controls are on whatever you're making a template for. Gives it some semblance of consistency.
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2010 22:34 |
|
|
There are many controllers out there that are knobs/sliders in banks of 8, so the remote SL isn't a bad case study: The up and down arrows in the upper right and left let you page through completely different settings for all the knobs. I was thinking of using the sliders for the VCA/VCF envelopes, and then using the encoders for the oscillator sections. Maybe the first page would be the first oscillator, the second page for the second oscillator etc. But then again, maybe the 8 encoders in the upper left could be the oscillator section, and the knobs in the lower left could be the VCA/VCF envelopes. Then the sliders could adjust filter settings, balance between oscillators, sub osc levels, total level etc. It would just be nice to come up with a useable layout that could translate to most synths. RivensBitch fucked around with this message at Jun 7, 2010 around 23:03 |
| # ? Jun 7, 2010 22:58 |
|
|
RivensBitch posted:I have a virus TI snow that I'd be willing to sell, I still have the original box, manuals, and everything. It's been on my desk for 2 years and has had 0 road time. HRM. Could be, I'll have a think about it. There are a few things ahead of the Snow in my 'stuff to spend disposable income on' list.
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2010 00:37 |
|
|
Get the desktop at least or preferably the full sized keyboard. It makes a great midi controller since it has tonnes of super high quality pots and every button and knob on the thing can send/receive cc/sysex messages. The key action is amazing. I don't even like the sound of the Virus oscillators, filters or effects but everything else about it (controls, build quality, workflow) is so far ahead of anything else in its class that I use it and love it anyway.
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2010 00:46 |
|
|
Yeah I hate To admit it but I'm selling the snow to buy the desktop so I can get more hands on with controls.
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2010 02:52 |
|
|
Haha yeah.. I wouldn't be using it live, just in the studio, but I would like more controls and I have a feeling I would get a bit that way after using the snow for a while.
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2010 03:14 |
|
|
Yeahhh, I knew the CZ-1000 would need batteries to hold the sounds I created, but I didn't know that It would take 6 D batteries... loving D Batteries... Do other vintage synths need this magnitude of battery power?
|
| # ? Jun 15, 2010 04:31 |
|
|
KevinHeaven posted:Yeahhh, I knew the CZ-1000 would need batteries to hold the sounds I created, but I didn't know that It would take 6 D batteries... loving D Batteries... Do other vintage synths need this magnitude of battery power? or just one dry cell battery!
|
| # ? Jun 15, 2010 05:09 |
|
|
KevinHeaven posted:Yeahhh, I knew the CZ-1000 would need batteries to hold the sounds I created, but I didn't know that It would take 6 D batteries... loving D Batteries... Do other vintage synths need this magnitude of battery power? My MC-202 takes C-Cells. At least your D's can also work in Mag Lights.
|
| # ? Jun 15, 2010 08:58 |
|
|
KevinHeaven posted:Yeahhh, I knew the CZ-1000 would need batteries to hold the sounds I created, but I didn't know that It would take 6 D batteries... loving D Batteries... Do other vintage synths need this magnitude of battery power? I'm 98% certain the CZ-1000 has a watch battery or some such for internal memory, I used to have one back in the day and I know I never used it with anything other than the wall wart. There's a CZ Yahoo group at http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/CZsynth/ you might want to check around. Also if nothing else I'm sure you could find an editor/librarian software you could use to store your patches. I wish I knew WTF ever happened to mine -- it was capable of some cool sounds though I barely had any idea how to program it at the time, I might have to pick up another one of these days.
|
| # ? Jun 15, 2010 16:38 |
|
|
h_double posted:I'm 98% certain the CZ-1000 has a watch battery or some such for internal memory, I used to have one back in the day and I know I never used it with anything other than the wall wart. I thought this too, and I also used to own a CZ-1000 and never bought any D batteries for it as far as I can remember. However I found a CZ101 Manual online and it states that you need D batteries to keep the memories, various on-line comments confirm this was true for the CZ-1000 as well Maybe I was sysex-ing the patches every time I used it or just leaving the wal-wart on all the time.
|
| # ? Jun 17, 2010 16:19 |
|
|
I just got some money from a land sale and am planning on getting a Voyager and a Future Retro XS  . That's about the closest to a modular I'm willing to go at this point.Leaves me with a wicked setup for the hardware I use. Virus KB, Ion, Prophet Five, Mopho, Korg Trinity Rack, Future Retro XS, Moog Voyager. I just love how the mopho sounds for electro style bass and whatnot.
|
| # ? Jun 19, 2010 22:20 |
|
|
I'm becoming absolutely fascinated by synthesizers lately after having spent two years learning how to play the piano. It seems like every synth on the market has some kind of drawback. I'm absolutely broke right now and won't be able to afford to buy a synthesizer for at least a year, but when I do, I'd really like to not end up spending money on one that I'm not going to be happy with. They are WAY cheaper than pianos and for the price of a piano, I could honestly buy 20 synthesizers. I'm really only considering ones that have polyphonic sound and I'm preferable toward analog ones. I'm looking for more information. But really, how can you know without one at your fingertips!
Here are a couple I'm considering buying. I find it amazing that the ones that are most appealing are not even in production anymore: Korg Polysix: Pretty much what I'm after. I can probably find one for less than 500$, but the only way to buy them is on ebay and craigslist. Other equipment that I might need to get this to work might also be hard to find. I really don't know what other equipment I'll need. Roland Jupiter-8: Really a rather expensive option. Again being an old machine, it might be annoying to find other equipment that is compatible with it, but possibly the most amazing sounds. Dave Smith Prophet 08: Played with this today and thought it was pretty good. Can buy this new for 2,000$. Four LFOs, two oscillators, and a stacking feature. Doesn't actually use VCOs but it does use subtractive synthesis. I don't really know if it's actually analog, even though it says it is right on the thing. There are lots of obvious digital components. Roland Fantom G8: Not an synthesizer, but a fully featured keyboard that includes several vintage synth sounds with the ability to control cutoff frequency, resonance, and ADSR. Perk of this is all the other sounds, sampling, stacking, lots of other cool things. Expensive and heavy. Roland Gaia or Korg R3: New digital synthesizers with lots of presets designed to imitate vintage synths. R3 has a vocoder. Gaia has some other cool features too. This is really my last choice, but they are available and user friendly. Monti fucked around with this message at Jul 5, 2010 around 22:35 |
| # ? Jul 5, 2010 22:26 |
|
|
I'd look for a Polysix or a Juno, or maybe a Prophet 600 ? They all have certain problems, but if you find a Polysix that had its battery replaced in time it should be solid for you. Also, dont get a JP-8. You could probably get a Prophet 5 and an Odyssey for the price!
|
| # ? Jul 5, 2010 23:08 |
|
|
Monti posted:It seems like every synth on the market has some kind of drawback. That's part of the joy of synthesis! It's about learning to work around or. preferably, WITH, those drawbacks that makes you a better sound-designer (synthesist?) Have you tried out VST's that emulate the classics? The Togu Audio Line (TAL) U-NO 60 is totally free (assuming you have a DAW to play it in) and emulates the Juno 60. Likewise, their TAL Bassline is an SH 101. There's a bunch of free legit emulator vsts out there if you look, and although the sound may not be perfect, they will at least give you an idea of what is possible and familiarise yourself with layouts.
|
| # ? Jul 5, 2010 23:14 |
|
|
I'm probably going to end up getting a polysix. I just want one for fall into my lap for 280$.
@bittywings, I assume you're talking about software. I haven't looked much into it. I just don't feel the creative control that I want without having a keyboard in front of me. I do have an 88-key casio privia, which is great for piano sounds, and it has a MIDI out. I plugged it into garage band once, but all those sounds are trash. I've been looking around my place for my USB midi jack, I paid 50$ for the stupid thing and I can't find it! ( just cleaned my entire place and still didn't find it. ) Also, I have used Ableton before, and I've thought about buying logic for my new computer, it's just not worth the money for me right now. I'm somewhat familiar with music production software, I just haven't used any of those VST's. I kind of feel like they won't really be worth installing, but maybe I'll give it a shot. Monti fucked around with this message at Jul 6, 2010 around 14:22 |
| # ? Jul 5, 2010 23:46 |
|
|
Of course what I really need is 50,000$ worth of equipment and software, but that's just not even close to the realm of possibility right now. I think if I can get something like a polysix, it should give me something to play around with. Honestly trying to make a record just seems like a dumb idea to me. I just don't have the image.
|
| # ? Jul 6, 2010 01:14 |
|
|
Monti posted:Dave Smith Prophet 08: Played with this today and thought it was pretty good. Can buy this new for 2,000$. Four LFOs, two oscillators, and a stacking feature. Doesn't actually use VCOs but it does use subtractive synthesis. I don't really know if it's actually analog, even though it says it is right on the thing. There are lots of obvious digital components. They are actually VCO's and 100% analogue. The 'digital' chips you see inside are Curtis CEM analogue IC's. Older Curtis synths that were poly mainly used CEM3394's I believe (a complete analogue synth voice contained in a single IC), but the newer Evolver/P08 synths use proprietary ones that Dave Smith gets in a special deal from Curtis Electronics. Either way, it's 100% analogue, it just looks like it's digital because it's shrunk down into an IC. quote:Roland Fantom G8: Not an synthesizer This is a synthesizer. toadee fucked around with this message at Jul 6, 2010 around 12:24 |
| # ? Jul 6, 2010 11:41 |
|
|
toadee posted:This is a synthesizer. It's debatable. Roland doesn't market it as such, and in my half-arsed looking through the promotion materials, the word "synthesiser" isn't used once, it's always workstation. edit: Yeah they're synths in technical terms as they have synth engines to edit the samples, but I personally wouldn't call them synths v v It's personal choice really.
Run Dodo Run fucked around with this message at Jul 6, 2010 around 12:11 |
| # ? Jul 6, 2010 12:06 |
|
|
Run Dodo Run posted:It's debatable. Roland doesn't market it as such, If you go to Roland's website, under 'Products' and then 'Synthesizers', on page 2 is the Fantom G8. It's a ROMpler basically, like a hyper-ROMpler, but that's definitely a synth.
|
| # ? Jul 6, 2010 12:21 |
|
|
Monti posted:I'm probably going to end up getting a polysix. I just want one for fall into my lap for 280$. Fair enough- I figured it'd be easier to try out a couple of cheap/free virtual ones just to get an idea of what's possible with your choices so you don't end up spending $$$$$ on something that doesn't actually do what you want (as I'm sure we've all done!) Good luck though dude, I hope you find that Polysix!
|
| # ? Jul 6, 2010 13:48 |
|
|
toadee posted:They are actually VCO's and 100% analogue. The 'digital' chips you see inside are Curtis CEM analogue IC's. Older Curtis synths that were poly mainly used CEM3394's I believe (a complete analogue synth voice contained in a single IC), but the newer Evolver/P08 synths use proprietary ones that Dave Smith gets in a special deal from Curtis Electronics. Either way, it's 100% analogue, it just looks like it's digital because it's shrunk down into an IC. Here's the review I read that says otherwise, somebody posted:Ok, so here is the serious failure in this product. I'd like to start with pointing out that it is NOT a VCO(voltage controlled oscillator) synth, it is a DCO(Digital controlled oscillator synth). A little history...The reason they began using DCO's in synths was due to the vast lack of stability in VCO's. Since they were voltage controlled they were subject to react to any radical change in the electrical current. There was also a common problem with parts working successfully and consistently with VCO's due to parts not working in harmony with each other capacitors etc... Thus they began to use DCO's. Many of the first DCO's are considered great synth's but even some of them are subject to irrational behavior. It is said that almost all Juno 106's will eventually die due to a bad voice chip design. So then for the sake of stability and of course cheaper product they began Virtual analog. The first were sometimes thin and brittle. But that changed in the mid late nineties with synths like the nord...Eh, ok so now that your up to speed. This is a DCO synth. Not a Re-issue of the 70's prophet." Either way, there seems to be a problem with adjusting the cutoff frequency and resonance quickly, which is something that I want to be able to do. The values will jump back to where they were before when you turn the knob! I thought this was because there weren't VCO's but I'll take your word for it, it must be from something else. It's not horrible, but it's not really much of an improvement over old polys for the price.
|
| # ? Jul 6, 2010 14:25 |
|
|
Actually, they're right, they ARE DCO's, I was mistaken. Really all that means though, is that the frequency of the voltage coming out of it is changed digitally rather than analogue. It's still analogue voltage coming out (and run through VCF's, VCA's, etc), but the clocking is done digitally. It's a pretty trivial distinction unless you're the type to analyze audio output in graph form rather than listen to it. The Curtis chips though, do have their own distinctive sound, so you should be sure you like that before investing. They've even programmed in tuning drift via the 'Oscillator Slop' parameter, if you feel like it. Especially with synths like the P08, your best bet is to go to a music store and play them. It's hard to tell what you really want without experiencing it a bit first.
|
| # ? Jul 6, 2010 14:34 |
|
|
A DCO is a digitally controlled ramp generator and comparator. It is nothing like a VCO which does not make it a bad thing. It just makes it a different thing. I don't understand why so many people operate under the assumption that VCO synths inherently sound better than DCO synths because there are many DCO synths that sound loving amazing like P-08, Juno-60 and OSCar, all of which have absolutely no parallels. Tuning stability is a plus for sure though.
|
| # ? Jul 6, 2010 16:07 |
|
|
I thought most VCO's were ramp generators and comparators as well, and the only difference between the two is the clock source?
|
| # ? Jul 6, 2010 17:15 |
|
|
Monti posted:Of course what I really need is 50,000$ worth of equipment and software, but that's just not even close to the realm of possibility right now. I think if I can get something like a polysix, it should give me something to play around with. Honestly trying to make a record just seems like a dumb idea to me. I just don't have the image. i think you're overthinking things a bit. getting something to play with is cool but beware of severely limiting yourself with an old monosynth or something, it wont be nearly as cool as you think and will take a lot more equipment just to record the thing! do you have a computer? maybe start with ableton + a controller or buy Native instruments Komplete or something
|
| # ? Jul 6, 2010 19:31 |
|
|
Monti posted:@bittywings, I assume you're talking about software. I haven't looked much into it. I just don't feel the creative control that I want without having a keyboard in front of me. The reason for that is that it's a zillion times more sane to get an audio interface and use your cheap-rear end terabyte harddisk to record on on a screen where you can actually do things with what you recorded instead of having everything on a miniature harddisk or flash-based recorder that's a computer in all but name with a tiny screen and old storage. I mean, gently caress, you could just switch on RECORD and have all 8 separate inputs pumping away while you go smoke and have dinner first, and then crank out some jams or whatever. At the end of the evening you hit STOP and you still have over 75% of the drive free. quote:I plugged it into garage band once, but all those sounds are trash. Allow me to demonstrate: http://theheartcore.com/music/armin...cation_dull.mp3 http://theheartcore.com/music/armin...ation_shiny.mp3 Which of these sounds better? it's exactly the same free plugin; it's just that one's got effects thrown over it and the other hasn't quote:I kind of feel like they won't really be worth installing, but maybe I'll give it a shot.  . Having no computer in your setup is completely possible; you're just making things hard for yourself if you're not well-versed in the background of hardware sequencing.Check http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmWwY5Hfp7E - then go consider a Tetra or something. Slowly build your stuff up and augment whatever you need with software.
|
| # ? Jul 6, 2010 19:50 |
|
|
The difference between VCOs and DCOs isnt trivial. In something like the Prophet 08, most folks will prefer DCOs that will stay in tune across the whole keyboard for nice harmonies and everything -- after all, you still have 2 DCOsbut a Minimoog would die if its oscillators werent constantly shifting phase ever so lightly with each other. Thats one of the really great things about the Polysix is that its VCOs stay in tune so well. The Unison mode actually has the keyboard send slightly detuned signals to each osc so theyll spread out! They were the last VCO chips Korg made, IIRC. The Mono/Poly has SSMs, which is great because they have 1V/Octave response but definitely does not lend the instrument such tuning stability as the Polysix has, or anything with DCOs would have --
|
| # ? Jul 6, 2010 21:22 |
|
|
toadee posted:I thought most VCO's were ramp generators and comparators as well, and the only difference between the two is the clock source? Right except that the DCO doesn't really oscillate. The timing of the reset pulse is digitally controlled by a high (super audio) frequency master clock from which you divide down into lower (audio) frequency clocks to derive pitch. Thats pretty much the definition of a digital system. If you take away the digital reset mechanism you are left with a ramp that goes from ground to the positive limit of the opamp and thats it. It doesn't oscillate. If you put in a capacitor and voltage comparator instead then you get a VCO but its subject to a whole new set of problems, mainly temperature related. The comparator circuit can develop an offset which triggers the reset early or late so many of them turn into these elaborate things with temperature compensation mechanisms and everything and oh god. Most of the instability inherent to VCOs can be simulated digitally. I think its still one of those things that is constantly being improved upon. I recently tried the OP-X pro demo and you can manually tune out all the oscillators, filters, envelope lengths and portmento lengths per voice. And all those tuning trim pots can be modulated to simulate drift. It really nails the Oberheim sound and its pretty unbelievable. I've got an Xpander and OP-X can sound uncannily like it that its scary. My Xpander is broken too (1 voice dead, 2x vcos dying, very unstable tuning possibly caused by knackered power supply) and the funny thing is that I can make OP-X pro sound like a proper Oberheim that needs a power supply recap. You can completely gently caress it up. Its excellent. The rest of the little subtleties to do with reset pulse variance (in slew and time) can probably be modelled if the gear designer knows what they want to achieve. WanderingKid fucked around with this message at Jul 6, 2010 around 22:48 |
| # ? Jul 6, 2010 22:41 |
|
|
All I meant was, the resulting output is a smoothe analogue slope rather than an aliased digital simulation thereof. People hear the digital in DCO and tend to assume that.
|
| # ? Jul 6, 2010 23:25 |
|
|
Yeah but a purely digital 'oscillator' also results in a 'smooth analogue slope'. It just does so after a DAC. DCO just eliminates the DAC. Also, DCOs can alias but not like what you see/hear in purely digital 'oscillators'.
WanderingKid fucked around with this message at Jul 6, 2010 around 23:52 |
| # ? Jul 6, 2010 23:50 |
|
|
DCOs can definitely sound great -- for clean polyphony decent DCOs beat decent VCOs
|
| # ? Jul 7, 2010 00:11 |
|
|
The prophet 08 is pretty nice. It just looks great with a nice wooden frame and it has some pretty amazing layering possibilities. I don't mean to knock it too much. I figured out how to change the values when a function knob causes the values to jump back. You just have to use the PARAM2 knob for every function. It's actually kind of annoying, I don't really get why the function knob doesn't just let you value to max and min. Played with it for another 2 hours today in the store with the manual in front of me, so I was actually figuring it out.
Can someone explain how destination works for the LFOs? I thought it just meant that was the point in the sequence in which the LFO was applied. Probably the coolest thing on the prophet 08 is the four LFOs.
|
| # ? Jul 7, 2010 00:27 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2013 03:57 |
|
|
As far as the software goes, I'm really hoping I can turn my Privia into a midi controller. It DOES have 7 octaves of weighted keys and a MIDI out-- now if I could only find my usb-midi cable..... I found another midi cable, but the other end is a 15 point giant thing that needs something else to interface with a computer.
|
| # ? Jul 7, 2010 00:31 |
|
