Access Virus b vs. Waldorf Q-Rack
Thomas Jaensch
what are the differences in sound, handling etc.?
personal preference?
thomas
Phong
Beware that with these modern synths, more features can be added with new
operating-systems.
"Thomas Jaensch" <thomas.jaen...@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:B653AF51.4F02%thomas.jaen...@gmx.de...
Ø. J. Eide
because of its characteristic mids. Saying Virus has more quality is a bit
on the subjective side. Q is a far more powerful synthesizer with much
greater sonic capabilities. IMO the Q is a more "mature" synth while the
Virus has more immediate attitude.
Phong <f_b...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3a3159e7$0$10648@reader3...
Thomas Jaensch
> I'll agree with you that the Virus has more character, but that's arguably
> because of its characteristic mids. Saying Virus has more quality is a bit
> on the subjective side. Q is a far more powerful synthesizer with much
> greater sonic capabilities. IMO the Q is a more "mature" synth while the
> Virus has more immediate attitude.
that's an interesting point of view. maybe the virus's stronger character
comes from its more restricted sonic versatility?
from what i learned so far about theses machines' properties i would have
called the virus the more mature one --- due to its more settled os.
on the other hand the q-r does have far more parameters, which he hides
behind multiply assigned endless controls. no little noses on the knobs show
the current position. the sound development process needs more thinking in
advance. is it this, what you mean with maturity?
while the virus does have characteristic mids, the q has got characteristic
trebles. at least they sound characteristically digital, but nevertheless
very beautiful and clear. i always thought about, why some eq-ing can't
reverse that.
as someone pointed out on the access mailing list there's one feature of the
virus, which makes up a significant difference in sound with respect to the
q. it's the virus's capability of inserting a saturation unit before the
second in a series of the two filters.
it seems to me, that this is essential in producing this very authentic
vintage sound.
and, phong, maybe some futute update of the q's os could add that
(hopefully).
thomas.thx
Ø. J. Eide
> Ø. J. Eide schrieb:
>
> > I'll agree with you that the Virus has more character, but that's
arguably
> > because of its characteristic mids. Saying Virus has more quality is a
bit
> > on the subjective side. Q is a far more powerful synthesizer with much
> > greater sonic capabilities. IMO the Q is a more "mature" synth while the
> > Virus has more immediate attitude.
>
> that's an interesting point of view. maybe the virus's stronger character
> comes from its more restricted sonic versatility?
> from what i learned so far about theses machines' properties i would have
> called the virus the more mature one --- due to its more settled os.
The OS on the Virus has been in development much, much longer. In this
respect Q is still in its early youth.
> on the other hand the q-r does have far more parameters, which he hides
> behind multiply assigned endless controls. no little noses on the knobs
show
> the current position. the sound development process needs more thinking in
> advance. is it this, what you mean with maturity?
When I say "mature" I'm referring to the overall feel and sonic capabilities
of the Q. Playing a Q and a Virus inspires me to do two very different types
of music.
> while the virus does have characteristic mids, the q has got
characteristic
> trebles. at least they sound characteristically digital, but nevertheless
> very beautiful and clear. i always thought about, why some eq-ing can't
> reverse that.
The frequency response on the Q's oscillators are significantly wider than
the Virus' which is why it sounds so much brighter than the latter. I've
always argued that it's better to have something you don't need than not
having something you do. Any unwanted high end on the Q can be easily toned
down with a LP filter or some EQ. However, its partially because of its
frequency response that the sonic capabilities are indeed so wide.
> as someone pointed out on the access mailing list there's one feature of
the
> virus, which makes up a significant difference in sound with respect to
the
> q. it's the virus's capability of inserting a saturation unit before the
> second in a series of the two filters.
> it seems to me, that this is essential in producing this very authentic
> vintage sound.
> and, phong, maybe some futute update of the q's os could add that
> (hopefully).
With three times the processing power of a Virus b (or kb, or Indigo), who
knows what tomorrow's features on the Q will be like. It all comes down to
how well Waldorf supports the Q. What Access has done with the Virus is
nothing short of amazing.
I'm still confused about the Micro Q. I haven't studied the specs but as far
as I can see it's got everything a Q Rack has on the inside. If that's true,
a Micro Q is unbelievable value for money. 16 Q voices vs. 4 MS2000 voices
at roughly the same price? Am I missing something here?
Thomas Jaensch
>...
>
> I'm still confused about the Micro Q. I haven't studied the specs but as far
> as I can see it's got everything a Q Rack has on the inside. If that's true,
> a Micro Q is unbelievable value for money. 16 Q voices vs. 4 MS2000 voices
> at roughly the same price? Am I missing something here?
as far as i understood it's a q-r minus sequencer and most knobs.
i think it's good, if you already have one _with_ knobs.
thomas
Ø. J. Eide
Unbelievable value for money if you ask me. I'm a little bit confused about
how much polyphony it comes with out of the box though. Waldorf writes "up
to 25 voices, expandable up to 75 voices". About Q and Q Rack they write "16
voices, expandable to 32 voices".
Thomas Jaensch
>> as far as i understood it's a q-r minus sequencer and most knobs.
>> i think it's good, if you already have one _with_ knobs.
>
> Unbelievable value for money if you ask me. I'm a little bit confused about
> how much polyphony it comes with out of the box though. Waldorf writes "up
> to 25 voices, expandable up to 75 voices". About Q and Q Rack they write "16
> voices, expandable to 32 voices".
hm. seems, that you're right. in the current release of the german "keys"
magazine there's a review of the microQ. but they don't say a word about the
number of voices.
any idea how much the expansion kit will cost?
thomas
Ø. J. Eide
Not available yet so I have no idea. Sorry.
How did it fare in the review?
Thomas Jaensch
>...
>> hm. seems, that you're right. in the current release of the german "keys"
>> magazine there's a review of the microQ. but they don't say a word about
> the
>> number of voices.
>> any idea how much the expansion kit will cost?
>...
>
> How did it fare in the review?
first they list all the technical facts, we already know (except for the
number of voices...). same as q. lfos reach audio range etc.
lots of parameters. and after getting accustomed to the machine nevertheless
good to handle.
finally: value for money: very good...
(oh, well, i found it: they say 16 voices(!), maybe they are wrong?)
Ø. J. Eide
16 voices certainly makes sense considering the Q and Q Rack are both 16
voices by default. What I don't get is "up to 25" without the expansion, and
"up to 75" with it.
Waldorf just uploaded a few more of my Q "demos" on their page. You can
check them out at http://www.waldorf-music.de/soundfiles.html
Thomas Jaensch
> 16 voices certainly makes sense considering the Q and Q Rack are both 16
> voices by default. What I don't get is "up to 25" without the expansion, and
> "up to 75" with it.
did you ask people@waldorf?
i found the following on the waldorf list:
> I'm sorry but there is no comparison list available. The differences
> between mQ and Q Rack are:
>
> Micro Q Hardware:
> - less controls
> - 2u rackmount
> - no digital output
>
> Micro Q Soundengine:
> - no step-sequencer
> - no xmorph function
> - filter routing only parallel or serial (not freely adjustable)
> - less effects at once (max. 5 in the mQ compared to 8 in the Q Rack)
>
> Filters, Envelopes, LFOs, Oscillators, Arpeggiator and Modulations are the
> same. Also the mQ offers 6 outputs (3 stereo outs) and 2 inputs (1 stereo
> jack), like the Q Rack does.
>
> Best Wishes,
>
> Joerg Huettner
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> Joerg Huettner TSi GmbH
> Product Support Neustr. 9-12
> j...@tsi-gmbh.de D-53498 Waldorf
> http://www.tsi-gmbh.de Hotline #: +49-(0)2636-9764-64
> http://www.waldorf-gmbh.de Fax #: +49-(0)2636-9764-99
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.mp3.com/Saros_Project/
>
... and later on:
>> Two things missing from this list i think:
>>
>> 1. - no CV or Switch inputs on the mQ
>> 2. - 25 voices (expandable to 75) vs. 16 in the keyboard/rack
>
> Oops - you're correct. But please not, that the CV or Switch Inputs are
> only available for the Q Keyboard, not the Q Rack.
>
> What you might add to the Q page: ... vs. 16 (or 32) voices in the Q
> keyb./Q Rack ... :-)
>
> Best Wishes,
>
> Joerg Huettner
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> Joerg Huettner TSi GmbH
> Product Support Neustr. 9-12
> j...@tsi-gmbh.de D-53498 Waldorf
> http://www.tsi-gmbh.de Hotline #: +49-(0)2636-9764-64
> http://www.waldorf-gmbh.de Fax #: +49-(0)2636-9764-99
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.mp3.com/Saros_Project/
>
i think this will answer your question
> Waldorf just uploaded a few more of my Q "demos" on their page. You can
> check them out at http://www.waldorf-music.de/soundfiles.html
so you're connected to waldorf. maybe i shouldn't trust your advice anymore
;-)
were all single sounds made by you? they sound very well.
apparently you already own a q. why buying another µQ?
with how many voices your q is equipped?
16 aren't enqough?
Ø. J. Eide
>
> i think this will answer your question
Yeah, that clear things up. Thanks.
> > Waldorf just uploaded a few more of my Q "demos" on their page. You can
> > check them out at http://www.waldorf-music.de/soundfiles.html
>
> so you're connected to waldorf. maybe i shouldn't trust your advice
anymore
> ;-)
> were all single sounds made by you? they sound very well.
Yes they are, and thank you. The 256Kbps versions sound much, much better
though. I have heaps more than what's on their page, too.
> apparently you already own a q. why buying another 犄?
I need to "degrade" to a Micro Q right now. I just sold my Q keyboard.
> with how many voices your q is equipped?
16.
> 16 aren't enqough?
Depends. Certainly can be.
Ø. J. Eide
>
> so you're connected to waldorf. maybe i shouldn't trust your advice
anymore
> ;-)
Woops, I forgot to comment this. I bought my Q (and fell in love with it I
might add) a while before I got "connected" to Waldorf. I just do product
demos of products I really appreciate now and again, and on a couple of
occasions the product manufacturer ask me for permission to use them. I'm in
no way biased towards the Q because I've done demos for Waldorf. Personally
I think the Q vs. Virus debate is very open. It really comes down to what
you're looking for in a VA synthesizer, and what kind of tonal
characteristics rings your bell.
Ø. J. Eide
>
> so you're connected to waldorf. maybe i shouldn't trust your advice
anymore
> ;-)
Woops, I forgot to comment this. I bought my Q (and fell in love with it I
Thomas Jaensch
hey, hope you don't feel offended. there was a ";-)" mark.
Thomas Jaensch
>>> Waldorf just uploaded a few more of my Q "demos" on their page. You can
>>> check them out at http://www.waldorf-music.de/soundfiles.html
>>
>> so you're connected to waldorf. maybe i shouldn't trust your advice
> anymore
>> ;-)
>> were all single sounds made by you? they sound very well.
>
> Yes they are, and thank you. The 256Kbps versions sound much, much better
> though. I have heaps more than what's on their page, too.
are they available for download somewhere? i'd like to hear them.
did you also produce some demosongs (solely with q)?
> I need to "degrade" to a Micro Q right now. I just sold my Q keyboard.
too bad. maybe you should suggest waldorf some sort of exchange:
demos+sounds against Q...
Ø. J. Eide
> Ø. J. Eide schrieb:
>
> >>> Waldorf just uploaded a few more of my Q "demos" on their page. You
can
> >>> check them out at http://www.waldorf-music.de/soundfiles.html
> >>
> >> so you're connected to waldorf. maybe i shouldn't trust your advice
> > anymore
> >> ;-)
> >> were all single sounds made by you? they sound very well.
> >
> > Yes they are, and thank you. The 256Kbps versions sound much, much
better
> > though. I have heaps more than what's on their page, too.
>
>
> are they available for download somewhere?
Afraid not.
> i'd like to hear them.
I can e-mail them to you if you want to, but it would be a pretty big
e-mail.
> did you also produce some demosongs (solely with q)?
Yeah, three or so.
> > I need to "degrade" to a Micro Q right now. I just sold my Q keyboard.
>
> too bad. maybe you should suggest waldorf some sort of exchange:
> demos+sounds against Q...
Hehe. I'll be happy with a Micro Q for now.
Ø. J. Eide
No no... Not at all. Just felt like explaining. No worries.
Thomas Jaensch
>...
> I can e-mail them to you if you want to, but it would be a pretty big
> e-mail.
>...
i tried to contact you via personal mail but didn't get any answer.
didn't you receive this or was it that you just didn't answer yet?
thomas
trans...@my-deja.com
voices of polyphony".
> a Micro Q is unbelievable value for money. 16 Q voices vs. 4 MS2000
voices
> at roughly the same price? Am I missing something here?
>
>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/