best virtual analog synth??
Wayne Welch
Hi all-
My next synth is gonna be... uhh... It used to be crystal clear: the Nord Lead.
But now I'm not so sure.
What's the _best_ virtual analog synth? Polyphonic, most versatile,
multitimbral, most voices, most types of sounds & fx (ie, should include
ring modulation, noise generator, midi syncable arpeggiator, midi syncable
lfo, mono mode w/portamento or glide, etc. etc.)
Yer advice eagerly sought! (Email replies appreciated.) Thanx!
=======> ZorchMan seZ: >>revUP>>>rockOUT>>>>raveON>>>>>> <=======
>>>"to the dulard even wine has no flavor...
but the SORCERER can become intoxicated
by the mere sight of water"- Hakim Bey <<<
mol8292
Take a look/listen at the Yamaha AN1x, it sounds very good, and has lot's
of nice options like 16-stepsequencer, arpeggiator, sync, FM etc.
Olaf
Wayne Welch <zo...@sirius.com> wrote in article
<zorch-18099...@ppp-asft01--027.sirius.net>...
Jouni Alkio
On Thu, 18 Sep 1997 18:26:17 -0700, zo...@sirius.com (Wayne Welch)
wrote:
>
>Hi all-
>
>My next synth is gonna be... uhh... It used to be crystal clear: the Nord Lead.
>
>But now I'm not so sure.
>
>What's the _best_ virtual analog synth? Polyphonic, most versatile,
>multitimbral, most voices, most types of sounds & fx (ie, should include
>ring modulation, noise generator, midi syncable arpeggiator, midi syncable
>lfo, mono mode w/portamento or glide, etc. etc.)
Well, even if the new Korg Z1 is more than just an analog modelling
synth it can be used as a very versatile virtual analog synth.
I think it has more Polyphony than the others (12 voices expandable to
18). It is also 6-part multitimbral.
It has 2 oscillators per voice (1 if you use some of the acoustic
modelling algorithms) plus a suboscillator and noise generator. It
also has VPM (kind of FM), PWM, ring modulation, cross modulation,
comb filter oscillator, resonance oscillator (with 4 resonant bandbass
filters producing the sound). It also has wave shaping.
It also has the acoustig modelling oscillator types of Organ, Epiano,
Plucked String, Bowed String and Reed. Note that these can be used for
synth sounds as well (they are by no means perfect in emulating real
acoustic instruments, the plucked string works great for acoustic
basses, though).
It has MIDI syncable Arpeggiator and LFO´s. It also has 5 programmable
knobs for any parameters you like and hard-wired knobs for the filters
and envelopes. And it has a two-dimensional touchpad controller. All
knobs and controllers send MIDI CC messages. And it has monomode with
portamento. (In multitimbral mode you can have some sounds in monomode
and the others in poly.)
It has 2 multimode filters per voice with resonance. Can be connected
in series or in paraller. Plus the noise generator has it´s own
resonant multimode filter!
The FX section is not very extensive but I think it is more than on
the other virtual analogs. It has 3 types of master FX and 15 types of
insert FX. (1 master effect and 1-2 insert effects at a time).
The biggest negative thing about the Z1 is that it only has one pair
of stereo outputs. And the presets might not impress you. You should
at least use the controllers when browsing the presets.
BTW, If you try out the Z1 I suggest you try programming your own
sounds with the arpeggiator running. I was just jamming with one sound
for half an hour the other day. It was living all the time with my
knob movements and the LFOs. The sound consisted of a resonance
oscillator giving a strange undulating background and a comb filter
osc producing the attack. I was modulating the resonance osc filters
with LFO´s and the "normal" filters with the knobs (I used dual
bandpass filters), occasionally strengthening the noise and sub
oscillators...
Greetings, Jouni
Michael Legner
As soon as I have the money to spend I will buy a Nord Rack 2!!!
Roland JP8000 sounds great until you remove the effects, then you
know what made it sound cool. Another problem is too few voices.
The An1x is more of a toy, again the number of voices is too small.
Haven't heard that much of this one to judge it myself but I didn't
for the printed info from Yamaha. Too few knobs, and to many "up-
down-keys". It's like a menu system without a display. Seems to
be just as hard to work with.
The Nord synths now have 16 voices... and it sounds great and has NO
effects (well it has an echo but I think it just adds a number of
notes...) so what you hear is what it creates. Usually the effects
can make it sound much better and that doesn't make the comparison
fair since you can add effects later (to the sound from the Nord Lead).
I wouldn't hesitate on the Nord Lead 2. But check it out for yourself
and read the manufacturers' printed information.
Once I thought the Korg Z1 was an alternative to these synths but
now I know better.
/Michael
In article <01bcc4d3$d647bb20$0b00a8c0@olaf>, "mol8292" <mol...@dds.nl> writes:
>Take a look/listen at the Yamaha AN1x, it sounds very good, and has lot's
>of nice options like 16-stepsequencer, arpeggiator, sync, FM etc.
>
>Olaf
>
>
>Wayne Welch <zo...@sirius.com> wrote in article
><zorch-18099...@ppp-asft01--027.sirius.net>...
>>
>> Hi all-
>>
>> My next synth is gonna be... uhh... It used to be crystal clear: the Nord
>Lead.
>>
>> But now I'm not so sure.
>>
>> What's the _best_ virtual analog synth? Polyphonic, most versatile,
>> multitimbral, most voices, most types of sounds & fx (ie, should include
>> ring modulation, noise generator, midi syncable arpeggiator, midi
>syncable
>> lfo, mono mode w/portamento or glide, etc. etc.)
>>
Chris Damian Stark
Jouni Alkio (al...@hkkk.fi) wrote:
Jouni is right; the Z1 kicks butt!
Chris (Z1 owner)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Chris D. Stark Computer Specialist
Office of Information Systems Webster Hall 310
University of Hawaii at Manoa School of Nursing
http://www2.hawaii.edu/~cdamian cda...@hawaii.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------
VVaveshape
>Once I thought the Korg Z1 was an alternative to these synths but
>now I know better.
Once I thought these $2000 "Virtual Analogs" were alternatives to real
analog, but now I know better.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
ryan reid v vave...@aol.com
industry.noise.speedcore.hardgoaacidtrance.badtripambient
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Paul Nagle
Michael...@lin.frontec.se (Michael Legner) wrote:
>Roland JP8000 sounds great until you remove the effects, then you
>know what made it sound cool. Another problem is too few voices.
So why remove the effects it if sounds better with them? You get the
effects with the synth so use them!
>The An1x is more of a toy, again the number of voices is too small.
>Haven't heard that much of this one to judge it myself but I didn't
>for the printed info from Yamaha. Too few knobs, and to many "up-
>down-keys". It's like a menu system without a display. Seems to
>be just as hard to work with.
Try it then judge it.
>The Nord synths now have 16 voices... and it sounds great and has NO
>effects (well it has an echo but I think it just adds a number of
>notes...) so what you hear is what it creates. Usually the effects
>can make it sound much better and that doesn't make the comparison
>fair since you can add effects later (to the sound from the Nord Lead).
True you can buy extra things to make synths sound good. Why not judge
synths for what you do get?
>I wouldn't hesitate on the Nord Lead 2. But check it out for yourself
>and read the manufacturers' printed information.
>
>Once I thought the Korg Z1 was an alternative to these synths but
>now I know better.
I'm not sure you do.....
Ah well....
Paul
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
www.softroom.demon.co.uk
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alex Forth
Michael Legner wrote:
> As soon as I have the money to spend I will buy a Nord Rack 2!!!
>
> Roland JP8000 sounds great until you remove the effects, then you
> know what made it sound cool. Another problem is too few voices.
I too was unimpressed with the JP-8000. It sounded very plain with
no difference in character across patches. Very disappointing,
Roland has produced some really great unique synths in the past, but
this is not one of them. It sounded like a weaker imitation of my
Chroma Polaris II.
Forget the JP-8000 and buy a 2nd hand JX-8P instead.
At least the Yamaha had variation in it's tone, and delivers more of
what the physical modeling technology promises: a synth that can
change character. Ignoring everything besides the sound
capabilities, the AN1x beats the JP-8000 hands down.
(Why else buy a synth if not for the sound?)
> The An1x is more of a toy, again the number of voices is too
> small.
For workstation, yes. For a specialist synth, no. It's repertoire
is very limited, but what it does, it does quite well (considering
the price). One day people will understand that you can't have a
box that does it all as well as the individual units.
Even so, it has more voices than your average analog machine, and
only 2 less than a Matix 12. By your reasoning I guess the minimoog
is a "toy" too, and 1/10th as useful as an AN1x? (monophonic verses
10 voice poly.)
The point obviously is it's far more important to have less voices
that do something good, than more voices that do nothing worthwhile
at all.
> Haven't heard that much of this one to judge it myself but I
> didn't
> for the printed info from Yamaha. Too few knobs, and to many "up-
> down-keys". It's like a menu system without a display.
Look more closely at the picture in your brochure and you'll see
that it does have a LCD display.
> Seems to be just as hard to work with.
So in otherwords, if the original poster went down to a music store
and played with one for 10 mins, he could get a more informed
opinion. (!) Your opinion is based on a cursory glance at a
product brochure.. Makes me question whether you should have
bothered to share it at all.
Alex Forth
Philippe Bogdan
Paul Nagle <pa...@softroom.demon.co.uk> wrote (ecrivait):
> True you can buy extra things to make synths sound good. Why not judge
> synths for what you do get?
>
I've been following this thread. I too wm thinking of getting a virtual
analog synth. I have spend some time with the JP8000, the ANX1 and the
Nord Lead.
I must honnestly say that I much prefer the Nord Lead to the Roland and
the Yamaha. It's not that they don't sound great, fat etc... but for me
they sound to, much like my other synths. The major difference is the
knobs of course. The effects are great, but the reason I want a virtual
analog synth is to get a 'raw' sound, being able to make it sound
'nasty', something the Roland can't really do. Both the Roland and the
Yamaha don't cut enough in a mix, in my opinion.
And the percussion sound in the Nord Lead are really great too.
My opinion, of course
Philippe (France)
VVaveshape
>I must honnestly say that I much prefer the Nord Lead to the Roland and
>the Yamaha. It's not that they don't sound great, fat etc... but for me
>they sound to, much like my other synths. The major difference is the
>knobs of course. The effects are great, but the reason I want a virtual
>analog synth is to get a 'raw' sound, being able to make it sound
>'nasty', something the Roland can't really do. Both the Roland and the
>Yamaha don't cut enough in a mix, in my opinion.
Why not get something with a real analogue filter if you want a raw sound?
Go for a Juno 106, Oberheim Matrix 6/1000, or a REAL Jupiter-8 with the
encore MIDI kit(gives it damn near all the functionality(with sysex instead
of cc) the JP-8000 with a MUCH better tone. Hell.. with the money you spend
on a "virtual analog" you could buy a Sequential Prophet T8 or VS, an
Oberheim Matrix 12 or even an Xpander.
Chris Randall
VVaveshape wrote:
> Why not get something with a real analogue filter if you want a raw
> sound?
> Go for a Juno 106, Oberheim Matrix 6/1000, or a REAL Jupiter-8 with
> the
> encore MIDI kit(gives it damn near all the functionality(with sysex
> instead
> of cc) the JP-8000 with a MUCH better tone. Hell.. with the money you
> spend
> on a "virtual analog" you could buy a Sequential Prophet T8 or VS, an
> Oberheim Matrix 12 or even an Xpander.
Stop me if I'm wrong, but I think the original question was one of
functionality versus price of the current crop of virtual analog synths.
Of course a Jupiter -6 or -8 is going to sound better than a JP-8000.
That's a stupid point. A Fairlight CMI has better factory string sounds
than an ASR-10, but who fucking cares, 'cause it's impossible to find 8
inch floppies. The issue is whether or not it is worth it to put up with
the headaches of finding one, and making it behave properly, instead of
buying something that is new, will possibly be multi-timberal, will be
under warranty, and you can return if you don't like it.
Let me preface my _opinion_ by saying that I own a JP-8000 now, and will
shortly own a Z1. Bearing that in mind, here is what I have
discovered...
The JP-8000 offers by far the most instant gratification as far as
programming is concerned. If you have any experience at all in
programming analog synths, it will be obvious from the start. However,
as an earlier poster pointed out, the only way to get any _fattness_ out
of it is to use the on-board chorus, and you might not really want to
have chorus on every sound. It's also really hard to get the delay to be
in the proper time, as you control the timing with a knob, rather than
from entering a number. It really does sound rather thin without any
onboard effects used. There is also an anoying click somewhere in the
filter section that is only eased by bumping up the attack on the VCF
envelope a little bit. This doesn't happen in every sound, but I can't
figure out why it occurs at all. Both of these facts are excessivly
annoying, IMHO. Good for live, not so good in the studio, where it seems
to sound much thinner, to the point of uselessness. Roland had some
strange ideas about playability when they designed it, too. For some
reason which I can't acertain, the ribbon controller sends and responds
to after-touch rather than using one of the other 90 or so controllers
available, (like 16, for instance, which everyone else seems to use for
ribbons...) which takes some getting used to if you're playing the JP
from another controller. It also doesn't send or respond to any messages
concerning knob movement, so you have to use one of the other
controllers if you want to MIDI-fy filter moves, or whatever. This is
actually easier than it sounds, but kind of a pain in the ass, if you
were expecting something like the CS1x, which sends _everything_ via
MIDI, 'cept the arpeggiator. (A huge oversight...)
As far as the AN1x goes, I've only played it in a music store, and was
completely underwhelmed. Typical Yamaha craziness as far as programming,
with an interface which reminds me of nothing so much as a Sequential
Split 8. That was pretty cool ten years ago. Seems stupid now. As far as
the sounds are concerned, it's not as quirky or 'Analog' as the JP. That
can be good or bad, depending on your point of view. Yamaha's factory
programmers always spend too much time trying to emulate other synths
rather than taking any of their platforms out for a spin.
I have a bit of a bias towards the Nord series. Don't like 'em, never
will. Lotsa people do, though. I think they're too brassy and brash
sounding, but that's only my opinion. Many satisfied users will tell you
otherwise. I'd think that Greg Hawkes probably likes his, 'cause every
sound seems like it came off a Cars record.
As for the Z1, you get what you pay for. It's the most expensive of the
bunch, but also the one with the most options. Eminantly playable, and
the best set of effects of all of them. The one thing people seem to
forget is that it's not really a member of the 'virtual analog' set.
That is one of the things it does, and probably the one it does best,
but it is more of a modelling synth than the others, which are doomed to
inhabit the pigeonholes that their manufacturers deemed they belonged
in. The Z1 is _NOT_ a polyphonic Prophecy. It's a whole different synth.
I will say that the factory sounds aren't the best in the world; I'll
grant you that, but how long you gonna use those, anyways? It's other
saving grace is that it's not blue or red. Not that this is really
important, I guess. Anyways, it seems to be much deeper than the others,
with a larger variety of oscilators to choose from, and a much easier to
use interface than the ANX1, wider variety of sounds than the JP or
Nord, and a better choice of controllers than all. Don't know if the
ribbon has the 'z' axis, like the Trinity, but it has 'x' and 'y', which
is a nifty idea. More knobs than you really need, and a usable display,
completely unlike the other three. It's also built like a tank, like all
Korg products, which is an extremely important issue if your keyboard is
ever going to leave your bedroom and go on tour. The AN1x is a toy in
comparison, and the JP is pretty delicate, too, what with all the knobs
and sliders and such.
Again, these are only my opinions. Don't send me any e-mail saying how
you know right where to get 8-inch floppies, 'cause I don't give a fuck.
-Chris Randall
er...@xs4all.nl
On 19 Sep 1997 11:00:46 +0200, Michael...@lin.frontec.se (Michael
Legner) wrote:
€The An1x is more of a toy, again the number of voices is too small.
€Haven't heard that much of this one to judge it myself but I didn't
€for the printed info from Yamaha. Too few knobs, and to many "up-
€down-keys". It's like a menu system without a display. Seems to
€be just as hard to work with.
I think you're completely mis-informed.
The "up-down-keys" have nothing to do with editing the sounds. You
edit with the knobs on the left. It's easy to program sounds.
Go play the instrument first before judging the number of voices to be
"too small". Oh, and check your sources.
Bye,
Erik.
"Run like Hell from Glowing Man...!" (Old QUAKIAN saying)
Erik van 't Woud er...@xs4all.nl
VVaveshape
>Stop me if I'm wrong, but I think the original question was one of
>functionality versus price of the current crop of virtual analog synths.
>Of course a Jupiter -6 or -8 is going to sound better than a JP-8000.
>That's a stupid point. A Fairlight CMI has better factory string sounds
>than an ASR-10, but who fucking cares, 'cause it's impossible to find 8
>inch floppies. The issue is whether or not it is worth it to put up with
>the headaches of finding one, and making it behave properly, instead of
>buying something that is new, will possibly be multi-timberal, will be
>under warranty, and you can return if you don't like it.
The jupiter 8 doesn't take anything like 8 inch floppies, they are seen on
this newsgroup for sale quite a bit, and behaves very well. You shouldn't
need to return it if you've researched the particular piece of equipment
and played it enough before buying it. And no-warranty does suck, yes.. but
personally, I think sound is unsacrificeable.
«» «» «» Philip Pilgrim«» «» «»
Waldorf MICROWAVE II hands down. It has analogue grit, bass and
power.
Philip
--
Philip Pilgrim The Lab Audio Works
5 Evan's Drive - Analog/Digital Recording/Processing
Hammonds Plains - Acoustic Analysis and Consulting
Nova Scotia, Canada - Analog Synth Modification and Repair
B4B 1M8 - Computer/Synth Interfacing
- Hardware/Software Development
Phone +1.902.835.7844
Email pil...@atcon.com
Philippe Bogdan
VVaveshape <vvave...@aol.com> wrote:
> Why not get something with a real analogue filter if you want a raw sound?
> Go for a Juno 106, Oberheim Matrix 6/1000, or a REAL Jupiter-8 with the
> encore MIDI kit(gives it damn near all the functionality(with sysex instead
> of cc) the JP-8000 with a MUCH better tone. Hell.. with the money you spend
> on a "virtual analog" you could buy a Sequential Prophet T8 or VS, an
> Oberheim Matrix 12 or even an Xpander.
>
My first synth was a Juno 60, then I got a SH101 and a JP 6 and a
Prophet 600. Sold all of them because I needed better MIDI feature for
sequencing. Never heard about the encore MIDI Kit for the Jupiter 8.
Sounds interesting. But the Roland sond are to 'tame' for my taste now.
For a while my dream was to get a T8...
But after all, I found that the NordLead 2 can do more than all these
synths together, it take less space and would probably be more reliable.
Honnestly, I don't really care how the sound is made, what I'm looking
for is a synth that have guts and has knobs. The NordLead 2 work very
well in a sequencer setup, can have up to 4 different arpeggiator going
at the same time, 4 discret outputs...
and it looks cool :-)
But it's not an analog synth, I agree. I only have one analog synth at
the moment, an AKAI VX90. No knobs, no sysex but some really nasty tasty
sounds.
Philippe (France)
Michael Legner
In article <342721ea...@news.xs4all.nl>, er...@xs4all.nl writes:
>On 19 Sep 1997 11:00:46 +0200, Michael...@lin.frontec.se (Michael
>Legner) wrote:
>
>€The An1x is more of a toy, again the number of voices is too small.
>€Haven't heard that much of this one to judge it myself but I didn't
>€for the printed info from Yamaha. Too few knobs, and to many "up-
>€down-keys". It's like a menu system without a display. Seems to
>€be just as hard to work with.
>
>I think you're completely mis-informed.
>The "up-down-keys" have nothing to do with editing the sounds. You
>edit with the knobs on the left. It's easy to program sounds.
>Go play the instrument first before judging the number of voices to be
>"too small". Oh, and check your sources.
>
>Bye,
>Erik.
All I have is the printed information from Yamaha. It has a description
on how the synth works, how many voices it has and how the matrix of
the knob and wealth of up-down-keys work. Haven't heard it though. For
me it isn't interesting to listen to it if it doesn't live up to the
other demands I have for the synth I am going to buy.
But I guess you could easily replace a knob with its movement with some
up-down-keys?!? Well, I can't argue with you as this synth is the one I
have checked out the least of. I think my post above roughly says "this
is what I think, but you should clearly try it yourself as I haven't..."
/Michael
Paul Nagle
Michael...@lin.frontec.se (Michael Legner) wrote:
>What I want is great SOUND GENERATION, not effects. Everyone knows how
>much the effects can color the sound of a synth. What if you don't want
>the effects? If you don't want that mega-reverb? Suddenly you are sitting
>there with a synth that sound cheap and cheezy!
Hmmm, OK but where do you draw the line? A filter is a processor which
colours the sound.
Few synths these days will FORCE a mega reverb on you - remember that
you are in charge and can program the effects unit yourself.
Modulation effects such as chorus colour the sound too but how many
Juno owners would turn off their chorus just to make a synth with no
chorus compare better? It's part of many beloved Juno patches.
Synthesis is about colouring sounds, any way we can. I would never
give up the two DDLs on my DSS1, nor would I turn them off to make it
sound thinner just cos someone else thought DDLs should always be
external.
Perhaps you mean that the effects in most synths are not truly
integrated with the synthesizer architecture, in which case I agree
that there is still much work required in this aspect of synthesis.
I'd like to be able to patch them in at any part in the signal path as
I can on my old modular. Or use the synth's LFOs to control chorus
rate or velocity to control distortion amount etc. as I can on my
Prophecy.
>I am not saying the Z1 is a bad synth. How could I? The only thing I
>I just don't think it is FOR ME as I am looking for an analogue-sounding
>synth which is EASY to use. From what I understand the Z1 is just as bad
Thanks for sharing that with us then. Cheerio.
Paul
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Nagle - pa...@softroom.demon.co.uk
www.softroom.demon.co.uk (Upd. 02/09/97)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sebastian Nyberg
One important thing that hasn't yet been mentioned: price.
At the dealer I checked with, the JP8000 was 55% more expensive
than the AN1x, and the Nord Lead 2 keyboard version was 90% more
expensive than the AN1x. Also, the AN1x seems to have the best
internal effects (at least on paper... the JP8000 doesn't have reverb,
for example), and the Nord Lead doesn't have any internal effects
at all. Now, if you already have effects units in your studio,
this isn't an issue, but for me, who is trying just to rely on
the internal effects of the synths I own because of finanical
issues, this means a LOT.
Sebastian
VVaveshape
>My first synth was a Juno 60, then I got a SH101 and a JP 6 and a
>Prophet 600. Sold all of them because I needed better MIDI feature for
>sequencing. Never heard about the encore MIDI Kit for the Jupiter 8.
>Sounds interesting. But the Roland sond are to 'tame' for my taste now.
>For a while my dream was to get a T8...
This really doesn't make sense to me.. you're saying the Juno's and
Jupiters were too tame for you? The virtual-analogs are far more tame.
>But after all, I found that the NordLead 2 can do more than all these
>synths together, it take less space and would probably be more reliable.
>Honnestly, I don't really care how the sound is made, what I'm looking
>for is a synth that have guts and has knobs. The NordLead 2 work very
>well in a sequencer setup, can have up to 4 different arpeggiator going
>at the same time, 4 discret outputs...
The method of synthesis is EVEYRTHING. I'd much rather have equipment that
I have to put a little extra work and care into and get nice sounds. People
are so lazy today, I swear. As if there's ANY other instrument out there
you DON'T have to tune.
>But it's not an analog synth, I agree. I only have one analog synth at
>the moment, an AKAI VX90. No knobs, no sysex but some really nasty tasty
>sounds.
The akai analogues are really underrated. Personally I like them even
better than the juno's.
() () () () () () () () () () () () () () () () () () () ()
ryan reid vvave...@aol.com
"There's nothing sexier than a woman with a 303." - [22Hz]
() () () () () () () () () () () () () () () () () () () ()
Michael Legner
In article <3422e6e...@news.demon.co.uk>, pa...@softroom.demon.co.uk (Paul Nagle) writes:
>Michael...@lin.frontec.se (Michael Legner) wrote:
>
>
>>Roland JP8000 sounds great until you remove the effects, then you
>>know what made it sound cool. Another problem is too few voices.
>So why remove the effects it if sounds better with them? You get the
>effects with the synth so use them!
Because the effects make it sound better until you have used it for a
while and begin to see though the effects, understanding what a piece
of junk you have bought. It's like seeing the ad for Jurassic Park and
then go and see it on the movies... It isn't always those flashy effects
that counts, sometimes it is the core of the product you want to be
good, not the effects.
>
>>The An1x is more of a toy, again the number of voices is too small.
>>Haven't heard that much of this one to judge it myself but I didn't
>>for the printed info from Yamaha. Too few knobs, and to many "up-
>>down-keys". It's like a menu system without a display. Seems to
>>be just as hard to work with.
>Try it then judge it.
I said I didn't want to judge it's sound or musical abilities. It just
wasn't for me due to its other shortcomings (in MY point of view). You
might like it, I don't care.
>
>>The Nord synths now have 16 voices... and it sounds great and has NO
>>effects (well it has an echo but I think it just adds a number of
>>notes...) so what you hear is what it creates. Usually the effects
>>can make it sound much better and that doesn't make the comparison
>>fair since you can add effects later (to the sound from the Nord Lead).
>True you can buy extra things to make synths sound good. Why not judge
>synths for what you do get?
Exactly, and I do not find good sound thanks to effects something special.
What I want is great SOUND GENERATION, not effects. Everyone knows how
much the effects can color the sound of a synth. What if you don't want
the effects? If you don't want that mega-reverb? Suddenly you are sitting
there with a synth that sound cheap and cheezy!
>
>>I wouldn't hesitate on the Nord Lead 2. But check it out for yourself
>>and read the manufacturers' printed information.
>>
>>Once I thought the Korg Z1 was an alternative to these synths but
>>now I know better.
>I'm not sure you do.....
>Ah well....
I am not saying the Z1 is a bad synth. How could I? The only thing I
have heard it a shitty demo in Future Music and I think that was more
due to a crappy review/demo than the synth itself. I would love to have
that machine on my desk, but with a limited budget it is important to
buy the right stuff, not the most spectacular machinery.
I just don't think it is FOR ME as I am looking for an analogue-sounding
synth which is EASY to use. From what I understand the Z1 is just as bad
as the rest of todays synths when it comes to usability (except for using
the presets).
/Michael
>
>Paul
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> www.softroom.demon.co.uk
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Legner
In article <3422DCC1...@ads.tdh.stateoftx.antispam.us>, Alex Forth <aforth....@ads.tdh.stateoftx.antispam.us> writes:
>Michael Legner wrote:
>
>> As soon as I have the money to spend I will buy a Nord Rack 2!!!
>>
>> Roland JP8000 sounds great until you remove the effects, then you
>> know what made it sound cool. Another problem is too few voices.
>
>I too was unimpressed with the JP-8000. It sounded very plain with
>no difference in character across patches. Very disappointing,
>Roland has produced some really great unique synths in the past, but
>this is not one of them. It sounded like a weaker imitation of my
>Chroma Polaris II.
>
>Forget the JP-8000 and buy a 2nd hand JX-8P instead.
>
>At least the Yamaha had variation in it's tone, and delivers more of
>what the physical modeling technology promises: a synth that can
>change character. Ignoring everything besides the sound
>capabilities, the AN1x beats the JP-8000 hands down.
>(Why else buy a synth if not for the sound?)
>
>> The An1x is more of a toy, again the number of voices is too
>> small.
>
>For workstation, yes. For a specialist synth, no. It's repertoire
>is very limited, but what it does, it does quite well (considering
>the price). One day people will understand that you can't have a
>box that does it all as well as the individual units.
Perhaps you're right, but I keep comparing the synths to each other
even if they don't cost exactly the same. I find 16 voices better
than 12 or 8 because then I can postpone the audio recording I would
have to do on track number two with a mono-synth.
>
>Even so, it has more voices than your average analog machine, and
>only 2 less than a Matix 12. By your reasoning I guess the minimoog
>is a "toy" too, and 1/10th as useful as an AN1x? (monophonic verses
>10 voice poly.)
Well, I never should have written that "toy" thing as it was right
from my heart. It was just my feeling when I read about it. I will
eagerly await the review of it in a Swedish magazine later this month.
For me it's a problem to go down to a music store and start playing
with a synth (if they at all have got the synth I ant to play)
because they aren't always that easy to get a representative sound
from.
>
>The point obviously is it's far more important to have less voices
>that do something good, than more voices that do nothing worthwhile
>at all.
>
>> Haven't heard that much of this one to judge it myself but I
>> didn't
>> for the printed info from Yamaha. Too few knobs, and to many "up-
>> down-keys". It's like a menu system without a display.
>
>Look more closely at the picture in your brochure and you'll see
>that it does have a LCD display.
Yes, I know there is an LCD but I was rather seeing the "matrix" on
the right hand as a menu system saving a lot of knobs. I guess you
have to look at the LCD at the same time to see the values you set
with all these buttons? I am not interested in whether the value is
56 or 112, I just want to get the sound. And I want to be able to
change the value like I do with a knob. This is impossible with
buttons.
>
>> Seems to be just as hard to work with.
>
>So in otherwords, if the original poster went down to a music store
>and played with one for 10 mins, he could get a more informed
>opinion. (!) Your opinion is based on a cursory glance at a
>product brochure.. Makes me question whether you should have
>bothered to share it at all.
Perhaps to get these responses? When I gathered this info at the
beginning of September there were no shops in Stockholm (that I
visited) that had the AN1x setup for demo as it has just arrived
here. At least one came out from this thread: there are people
who find the AN1x to be a useful synth.
/Michael
>
>Alex Forth
>
Michael Legner
Yes, all that is up to each and everyone to decide. The price of the
AN1x is good, but for some people it doesn't matter since they don't
think you get more than you pay for. Suddenly you get that urge to
buy the synth you really wanted and you have two piece requiring
more space on your desk and having dug an even deeper hole in you
wallet.
I still believe I will be able to add effects to my tracks with
Cool Edit 96 and Digital Orchestrator Plus. Software effects are
cheaper than hardware ones and having an AWE64 Gold with extra
memory would mean routing the wavetable sound out of the computer
through an effect and I haven't confirmed if this works with the
limited full-duplex functionality of the Creativ cards.
Imust say I am leaning towards the Nord synths for their ease of use
and sound, not the price. As I have limited space for my musical
hobby I will buy the rack version of the Nord. I don't think there
is a rack version of the AN1x or the JP8000.
/Michael
t...@seersystems.com
If you own a Pentium-based compter, you might consider Reality, the
software-based synth. In its analog synthesis mode it offers 4
oscillators, 4 LFOs, 4 Filters (several different types and slopes) and 4
Envelopes. All of these modules have routable parameters, mostly
controllable in real-time through MIDI. Reality also includes FM, Physical
Modeling, wavetable and modal synthesis methods. It only has two outputs
but the audio can be mixed internally and saved. Polyphony depends on
computer speed and voice complexity. My P200 MMX usually maxes out between
25 - 30 voices.
I use Reality everyday. My music demands rich complex timbres and I
haven't yet found a circumstance when this synth hasn't performed
wonderfully.
Check it out for yourself at http://www.seersystems.com. Be sure to order
the free CD. Although the CD doesn't show off the full capabilities of
Reality, I'm sure that synthesists will be able to recognize the wide
sonic potential.
And you don't have to take my word for it. Read Dennis Miller's review in
the October Electronic Musician or Craig Anderton's review in EQ's August
issue.
Ted Henderson
Seer
1-888-232-7337 ext. 112
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
David Gosnell
Michael Legner wrote:
> I mean, my PPRO200/64MB ends up being overused when I want to record
> audio tracks and midi while running a software synthesizer. Or am I
> supposed to play only one track at a time on Reality when I am using
> harddisk recording? (Of course, this problem applies to ALL software
> synthesizers!)
Not if you use one of the older generation non-realtime software
synthesisers, such as WaveCraft. You use these in conjunction with
wavetable soundcards or samplers, and get sound quality better than most
realtime solutions, without tying up the CPU when you're sequencing.
With an AWE32 or similar card, you can get 32-note polyphony, at 44.1kHz
16-bit sampling, with the CPU barely ticking over!
--
David Gosnell
These personal views are not necessarily those of my employer.
(please remove "uce-buster." from my e-mail address if replying direct)
Michael Legner
[rant warning on]
What I don't get is how you people who make software synthesizer think
we buyers should do to make our harddisk recording sequencer co-exist
with this new CPU hog? I mean, it's not like the the CPU is unused by
the audio recording/playback programs of today.
I mean, my PPRO200/64MB ends up being overused when I want to record
audio tracks and midi while running a software synthesizer. Or am I
supposed to play only one track at a time on Reality when I am using
harddisk recording? (Of course, this problem applies to ALL software
synthesizers!)
When you try to convince people that they are saving $$$ when they buy
Reality don't forget to tell them you are using up their expensive tool
for doing music: the computer.
The extra power needed by Reality + the price of Reality might even
pay for that hardware synth with all its nice knobs and sliders. I am
not convinced that turning knobs with the mouse is better...
/Michael
PS. I think you should make the demo CD for Reality show off all those
different timbres. As it is now it only shows how narrow its sound is. DS
[phew!, rant warning off]
t...@seersystems.com
In article , Michael...@lin.frontec.se says...
>
>
>[rant warning on]
>
>
>What I don't get is how you people who make software synthesizer think
>we buyers should do to make our harddisk recording sequencer co-exist
>with this new CPU hog? I mean, it's not like the the CPU is unused by
>the audio recording/playback programs of today.
>
Reality can import wav files. That would allow you to use Reality to trigger you
vocals, guitar parts, etc and only counts as a CPU hit of 1 osc, 0 filter. Your
system can play 64 such tracks. You also have the option of selecting a lower
sample rate (22 or 11) for non-critical parts. This technique also reduces the
hit on the CPU..
Ted
Seer
t...@seersystems.com
Michael Legner
But I can do this without Reality. I can easily make a soundfont for my
AWE64 Gold which contains the samples I want to play (by doing that I
also get the rest of the functionality: pitch bend, velocity etc). If
the samples get too big for my extra RAM I can put it directly into
Digital Orchestrator Plus as the sample will be long enough to easily
put on the right beat.
/Michael
Gints Klimanis
Michael Legner wrote:
> What I don't get is how you people who make software synthesizer think
>
> we buyers should do to make our harddisk recording sequencer co-exist
> with this new CPU hog? I mean, it's not like the the CPU is unused by
> the audio recording/playback programs of today.
> I mean, my PPRO200/64MB ends up being overused when I want to record
> audio tracks and midi while running a software synthesizer. Or am I
> supposed to play only one track at a time on Reality when I am using
> harddisk recording? (Of course, this problem applies to ALL software
> synthesizers!)
Please see an emerging trend: you buy a generic box (you already have a
beatuty PPro200) and replace its sound
software. While it may be more studly to buy a keyboard with a big
front panel and buttons, you end up buying a lot of redundant computer
hardware of which you only use a fraction of its abilities. The Pentium
software computers are running the same software DSP algorithms that
you find in most of your studio gear. I suppose the problem is a
human issue: we don't perceive value in stuff that we can't hold in our
hands.
> When you try to convince people that they are saving $$$ when they buy
>
> Reality don't forget to tell them you are using up their expensive
> tool
> for doing music: the computer.
The argument of cost effectiveness is valid for people that create music
withpurely synthesized sound. Some of the tunes on the demo sounded
like
finished products. Every company peddling a product is a spin doctor.
Seer says that they offer a cool toy for a computer you already
have or are thinking about purchasing anyway.
> The extra power needed by Reality + the price of Reality might even
> pay for that hardware synth with all its nice knobs and sliders. I am
> not convinced that turning knobs with the mouse is better...
You don't have to be convinced. Seer is at the head of a new trend:more
synth voices with your existing computer. They surely have no intention
of
asking you to ditch your racks of gear. However, I've grown weary of
of setting up/tearing down all of those plugs, MIDI cables and wires.
> PS. I think you should make the demo CD for Reality show off all those
>
> different timbres. As it is now it only shows how narrow its sound is.
> DS
True. However, I liked their demo CD. Until more users make sounds,
synthesizer manufacturers have to rely on their initial factory sounds.
Lots of synths (Waldorf MicroWave) were initially shipped with
a small set of usable sounds surrounded by a lot of butt-ugly sounds.
Probocidean
In article <34278B...@uce-buster.open.ac.uk>, David Gosnell <D.T.E....@uce-buster.open.ac.uk> wrote:
>Michael Legner wrote:
>
>> I mean, my PPRO200/64MB ends up being overused when I want to record
>> audio tracks and midi while running a software synthesizer. Or am I
>> supposed to play only one track at a time on Reality when I am using
>> harddisk recording? (Of course, this problem applies to ALL software
>> synthesizers!)
>
>synthesisers, such as WaveCraft. You use these in conjunction with
>wavetable soundcards or samplers, and get sound quality better than most
>realtime solutions, without tying up the CPU when you're sequencing.
>With an AWE32 or similar card, you can get 32-note polyphony, at 44.1kHz
>16-bit sampling, with the CPU barely ticking over!
>
no real time capabilities.
My understanding is that Reality includes the capability to record it's output
into a wave file. Therefore you can do do your sound programming in real-time,
save it as a wave file, and use the sound the same way as a .wav produced with
WaveCraft.
KL
Gints Klimanis <gi...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in article
<609a4v$o...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>...
> Lots of synths (Waldorf MicroWave) were initially shipped with
> a small set of usable sounds surrounded by a lot of butt-ugly sounds.
Which raises the real question: Are you buying the factory pre-sets, or are
you proficient enough to create your own original sounds? The Waldorf range
of synths are by far the most savage offering by any manufacturer in the
recent past.
If you can't get your brain around real synth programming, get yourself a
Yamaha home organ.
Blackstone Hamilton
I don't understand why a person asks these kind of questions. I couldn't
purchase any new synth without going to the store to find out what it's
like. I ask to read the manuals so that I can do more than scroll the
presets. Get a feel for the damn thing. A given person who is serious
about music, already knows ahead of time what he needs in terms of
features. Maybe he has to buy 2 or 3 keyboards to get the job done. Why
would I just go and buy a keyboard based on some dreamer's opinion.
If you ask a question like, "What sort of problems have you run into with
xyz gear?" then I can understand that. Pitfalls are not easy to ascertain
until you've gotten a little deeper into the box. But just because a given
synth has a million features, is no guarantee that it is useful sonically.
The other irritating thing about this question is that every keyboard has a
performance and sonic personality. It is imbued with its creators' vision.
There IS NO BEST. There is only what is useful to your art.
Your questions are not at all thought out, and as such you will undoubtedly
choose unwisely, if you choose at all. Why don't you ask this question?
"What sort of girl should I go out with?"
Wayne Welch <zo...@sirius.com> wrote in article
<zorch-18099...@ppp-asft01--027.sirius.net>...
> Hi all-
>
> My next synth is gonna be... uhh... It used to be crystal clear: the Nord
Lead.
>
> But now I'm not so sure.
>
> What's the _best_ virtual analog synth? Polyphonic, most versatile,
> multitimbral, most voices, most types of sounds & fx (ie, should include
> ring modulation, noise generator, midi syncable arpeggiator, midi
syncable
> lfo, mono mode w/portamento or glide, etc. etc.)
>
> Yer advice eagerly sought! (Email replies appreciated.) Thanx!
>
> =======> ZorchMan seZ: >>revUP>>>rockOUT>>>>raveON>>>>>> <=======
>
> >>>"to the dulard even wine has no flavor...
> but the SORCERER can become intoxicated
> by the mere sight of water"- Hakim Bey <<<
>
Gints Klimanis
KL wrote:
> Gints Klimanis <gi...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in article
> <609a4v$o...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>...
> > Lots of synths (Waldorf MicroWave) were initially shipped with
> > a small set of usable sounds surrounded by a lot of butt-ugly
> sounds.
>
> Which raises the real question: Are you buying the factory pre-sets,
> or are
> you proficient enough to create your own original sounds? The Waldorf
> range
> of synths are by far the most savage offering by any manufacturer in
> the
> recent past.
>
Good point. Do not exclude users. Consider the thousands of DX
seriespatches available. Although the greater percentage sucked, lots
of
interesting sounds were available.
> If you can't get your brain around real synth programming, get
> yourself a
> Yamaha home organ.
or buy a synth with lots of manufacturer and user support.
Michael Legner
In article <19970925033...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, fy...@aol.com (Fymah) writes:
> >But I can do this without Reality. I can easily make a soundfont for my
> >AWE64 Gold which contains the samples I want to play (by doing that I
> >also get the rest of the functionality: pitch bend, velocity etc). If
> >the samples get too big for my extra RAM I can put it directly into
> >Digital Orchestrator Plus as the sample will be long enough to easily
> >put on the right beat.
> >
> >/Michael
> >
>
> However, you miss the point by far. Actually the AWE64 Gold is the
> recommended card right now since you can use the SPDIF output. However,you
> can of course use the AWE card and Reality at the same time, but Reality's
> power is analog style synthesis and combining other sythesis types with
> realtime control. I don't see any soundcard letting you have
> multioscillator-multimode resonant filtering with various realtime MIDI
> control that actually runs today.
>
I know, but I was just a tad surprised by the Reality representative that
suggested I would use it for this. Completely stupid to go and pay $$$ for
Reality to do things I can do already.
Getting back to what Reality is really for, I just say that for a lot of
us it is very VERY extremely VERY hard to turn knobs on the screen with a
mouse. Not to talk about jumping between knobs in real time. The demo CD
didn't make me jump high when it comes to sounds. Sounded like one track
repeated over and over again. After some time I had to press fast forward.
I didn't want to miss anything that might have sounded original so I didn't
just press eject. I should have done that.
The other problem was the CPU usage of Reality, which will make my expensive
computer to behave like something I avoided when I bought it. I _want_ to
be able to use my PPRO200 for midi AND audio recording. That is its main
purpose. If I am forced to buy an even more expensive one to still be able
to do these two things I could just as well have spent that money on some-
thing that has knobs and I can touch with my fingers.
It just my opinion.
/Michael
Fymah
Gints Klimanis
Michael Legner wrote:
> In article <19970925033...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
> fy...@aol.com (Fymah) writes:
>
> > However, you miss the point by far. Actually the AWE64 Gold is the
> > recommended card right now since you can use the SPDIF output.
> However,you
> > can of course use the AWE card and Reality at the same time, but
> Reality's
> > power is analog style synthesis and combining other sythesis types
> with
> > realtime control. I don't see any soundcard letting you have
> > multioscillator-multimode resonant filtering with various realtime
> MIDI
> > control that actually runs today.
> >
>
> I know, but I was just a tad surprised by the Reality representative
> that
> suggested I would use it for this. Completely stupid to go and pay $$$
> for
> Reality to do things I can do already.
>
You describe a capable studio that you already own. I have spent some
timewith Reality and have found that it has several new synthetic
abilities that
other machines do not have.
> Getting back to what Reality is really for, I just say that for a lot
> of
> us it is very VERY extremely VERY hard to turn knobs on the screen
> with a
> mouse. Not to talk about jumping between knobs in real time. The demo
> CD
Few synthesizers of today offer the array of knobs and sliders that we
lust for.Do you use a computer-based patch librarian and editor?
Reality
offers an integrated editor. You don't have to putz with your MIDI
router just
to change sound on your external MIDI gear.
> didn't make me jump high when it comes to sounds. Sounded like one
> track
> repeated over and over again. After some time I had to press fast
> forward.
> I didn't want to miss anything that might have sounded original so I
> didn't
> just press eject. I should have done that.
Ok. You didn't like the demo. Many synths have been shipped with
suckydemos or no demos at all.
> The other problem was the CPU usage of Reality, which will make my
> expensive
> computer to behave like something I avoided when I bought it. I _want_
> to
> be able to use my PPRO200 for midi AND audio recording. That is its
> main
> purpose. If I am forced to buy an even more expensive one to still be
> able
Who's forcing you to buy a new computer?
> to do these two things I could just as well have spent that money on
> some-
> thing that has knobs and I can touch with my fingers.
Clearly, today, you are not a customer for PC software synthesizers.
You
must ask yourself if your distaste for products such as Reality is
basedon neophobia (fear of the new) for changes in recording tools or
actual
defects in the product.
Probocidean
I've spent some time working with Reality and find that I'm very disappointed.
While it may be "jack of all trades" there's nothing that it does particuarly
well. The filters are mediocre. The programming interface is crude. The
sliders remind me of something slapped together using visual basic over a
weekend. And the lack of any type of visual editing enviorement (e.g. visual
envelope settings, velocity curves, etc) is simply silly.
Reality would be a nice product if it was priced in the $100 price range, but
at $600 it's a kludge.
>
>Clearly, today, you are not a customer for PC software synthesizers.
>You
>must ask yourself if your distaste for products such as Reality is
>basedon neophobia (fear of the new) for changes in recording tools or
>actual
>defects in the product.
>
>
In my case, I just think its a substandard product for the price.
Robert Hoffman
Gints Klimanis wrote:
>
> Few synthesizers of today offer the array of knobs and sliders that we
> lust for.Do you use a computer-based patch librarian and editor?
> Reality
> offers an integrated editor. You don't have to putz with your MIDI
> router just
> to change sound on your external MIDI gear.
>
Not really a good argument. I haven't had to putz around with my router
to change a sound in about 9 years. They call them Multiport interfaces
like the MOTU MIDItimepiece, Opcode Studio 5 and 4, etc. These all offer
an integrated work enviroment that makes software editors a breeze to
use.
>
> Who's forcing you to buy a new computer?
>
Seer is, for those who use a Mac, Reality is useless, and for thosae who
already tax their PC CPU's processing speed they have no room for
Reality.
>
> Clearly, today, you are not a customer for PC software synthesizers.
> You
> must ask yourself if your distaste for products such as Reality is
> basedon neophobia (fear of the new) for changes in recording tools or
> actual
> defects in the product.
This may be the case for some, however, Seer has missed some great
opportunities - killer idea, but it seems their market research could
have been more extensive.
--
Rob Hoffman
email: rob...@ix.netcom.com
http://www.netcom.com/~rob1622
Michael Kurz
>Perhaps you mean that the effects in most synths are not truly
>integrated with the synthesizer architecture, in which case I agree
>that there is still much work required in this aspect of synthesis.
>I'd like to be able to patch them in at any part in the signal path as
>I can on my old modular. Or use the synth's LFOs to control chorus
>rate or velocity to control distortion amount etc. as I can on my
>Prophecy.
Then you should have a look at GENERATOR where everything can be
connected to everything else. It has the advantages of both a modular
synthesizer with complete freedom and a digital synthesizer where you
can store your settings and play polyphonically and multitimbrally.
Get the free Demo (for Windows 95 / Pentium) from
www.native-instruments.de, try it out and say what you think.
Sure, it can eat up a lot of CPU power so you should seriously think
about what other CPU-hungry applications you can run at the same time.
But the point is that Generator lets you do things which are not
possible any other way while it can also do standard virtual analog or
FM. Show me any other system that can frequency-modulate triangle
waves with a resonant-filtered sawtooth, play the whole thing with
polyphony, apply a heavy overdrive effect and modulate all parameters
in realtime with MIDI (see the FatOverdrive demo preset).
Michael Kurz
(mic...@native-instruments.de)
Generator Developer
Timothy Kelly
Hi All,
Well, no one makes a software synth that doesnt gobble a lot of cpu power.
And no one makes a software synth claiming you can use it in real time, at the
same time you are doing digital audio in real time all on the same computer
and hard drive.
No one even makes a software synth, intending it to be used on a gig just
like some non software synth. But, you can do it with the fastest ones, if
your system is fast enough, and you take your computer to all your gigs.
Software synths are for composing, or for playback of already composed
pieces. At least in this century.
Happy Synths
Timothy Kelly
MidiVox
Chuck Willis
I would say that the real power of software synths is in creating samples
that you can then put into your hardware sampler for shows, composing, etc.
Chuck
Chuck Willis - cfwi...@uiuc.edu - http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/cfwillis/
Finger me for my PGP Public key keyID = DBBBF455
Fingerprint = 4E 7A FE A7 D7 80 F1 F6 4D FF 98 1E 59 CC 77 A6
Gints Klimanis
Timothy Kelly wrote:
> Hi All,
> Well, no one makes a software synth that doesnt gobble a lot of cpu
> power.
> And no one makes a software synth claiming you can use it in real
> time, at the
> same time you are doing digital audio in real time all on the same
> computer
> and hard drive.
The Reality software synth makes this claim. One of my friends uses
Realityon his laptop (although it's a fast laptop) computer. The Seer
folks say that
the latency is under 10 milliseconds for any number of sustained voices.
That's better than most "hardware" synths shipped for the pro market.
I have a strong feeling that Seer will have a tough time overcoming
unsubstantiated criticisms of software synths because soft synths are
just so fun to pick on.
> No one even makes a software synth, intending it to be used on a
> gig just
> like some non software synth. But, you can do it with the fastest
> ones, if
> your system is fast enough, and you take your computer to all your
> gigs.
> Software synths are for composing, or for playback of already
> composed
> pieces. At least in this century.
Nah. Give the latest round of music products a try. Remember that
"hardware"synths are computers that are wrapped in a cool package. If a
fast 200 MHz
microprocessor doesn't offer enough voices, wait a year and spend the
same
money on the 300 MHz ones.
«» «» «» Philip Pilgrim«» «» «»
Waldorf MicrowaveII wins!
Philip
--
Philip Pilgrim The Lab Audio Works
5 Evan's Drive - Analog/Digital Recording/Processing
Hammonds Plains - Acoustic Analysis and Consulting
Nova Scotia, Canada - Analog Synth Modification and Repair
B4B 1M8 - Computer/Synth Interfacing
- Hardware/Software Development
Phone +1.902.835.7844
Email pil...@atcon.com
Rick Reyes
Isn't that a "wavetable" synth?
Rick
>Waldorf MicrowaveII wins!
>
>Philip
>
g...@uiuc.edunospam
chads...@aol.com (Chadstahlm) writes:
>LISTEN, THE BEST WITHOUT A DOUBT IS THE ROLAND JP-8000. I OWN ONE AND
>IT IS LOUDEST
No doubt! I mean seriously, the amp on that sucker makes it the best
little synth ever made.. Damn, I thought the prophecy was cool, but
the amp just can't put out that extra watt that you really need to
break through in the mix.
BTW, I heard the AWE32 (yeah! for your PC!) can put out 4 Watts! YES!
There's no way anyone could make a better synth than that!
> AND BEST SOUNDING MACHING ON THE MARKET. A FEW BUGS WITH THE OSC's BUT
> THIS IS NOT A PROB. BUY THE JP AND YOU WILL BE HAPPY.
blah blah blah -gg
Chadstahlm
LISTEN, THE BEST WITHOUT A DOUBT IS THE ROLAND JP-8000. I OWN ONE AND IT IS
Michael Legner
"...You're on ten on the guitar, ten on the amp... Where can you go from
that? Right! Nowhere! We need that extra push over the cliff... That's why
this one goes to eleven."
"Why don't you make ten the loudest and just make that louder?"
"Well... This one goes to eleven..."
(Everyone should have watched "Spinal Tap")
/Michael
In article <60sape$u...@far0758.urh.uiuc.edu>, g...@uiuc.eduNOSPAM writes:
>chads...@aol.com (Chadstahlm) writes:
>
>>LISTEN, THE BEST WITHOUT A DOUBT IS THE ROLAND JP-8000. I OWN ONE AND
>>IT IS LOUDEST
>
>No doubt! I mean seriously, the amp on that sucker makes it the best
>little synth ever made.. Damn, I thought the prophecy was cool, but
>the amp just can't put out that extra watt that you really need to
>break through in the mix.
>
>BTW, I heard the AWE32 (yeah! for your PC!) can put out 4 Watts! YES!
>There's no way anyone could make a better synth than that!
>
>> AND BEST SOUNDING MACHING ON THE MARKET. A FEW BUGS WITH THE OSC's BUT
>> THIS IS NOT A PROB. BUY THE JP AND YOU WILL BE HAPPY.
>
>blah blah blah -gg
Bjorn
> Nah. Give the latest round of music products a try. Remember that
> "hardware"synths are computers that are wrapped in a cool package. If a
> fast 200 MHz
> microprocessor doesn't offer enough voices, wait a year and spend the
> same
> money on the 300 MHz ones.
A Pentium-133 is roughly equal to one-two normal DSP's, so there is no
question that there isn't enough horsepower to do good synthesis on a PC.
However, horsepower is not the real problem. The real problem is latencies.
Forget about doing _anything_ on the same PC. A midi interface has about 2
ms latency and even that the pro's are complaining about, they want 1 ms.
Running something with those requirements on win95? Hah :) Also the way
soundcards for PC's are designed (with buffers that are DMA'ed from the
main memory to the soundcard) you get an output latency as well.
If you take over the computer completely, for example running in dos
protected mode directly, you could minimize the OS latency but still had to
battle the soundcard problem.
It's hard to compete with a DSP that calculates every output sample within
a few samples time before it is output, even with a fast PC.
I think instead the synth market will grow more features, like downloadable
algorithms and get better interfaces and get more userfriendly. A clumsy PC
with millions of cables can't compete with a slick synth in a flightcase
when you go to your gig.
/Bjorn
philip pilgrim
Philippe Bogdan wrote:
> But after all, I found that the NordLead 2 can do more than all these
> synths together, it take less space and would probably be more reliable.
> Honnestly, I don't really care how the sound is made, what I'm looking
> for is a synth that have guts and has knobs. The NordLead 2 work very
> well in a sequencer setup, can have up to 4 different arpeggiator going
> at the same time, 4 discret outputs...
I found the nord lead nasal and bright. It was good for sync modulations
but not much more. The microwave II and JP-8000 (which I auditioned at
the
same time) were far more interesting sonicly and functionly.
Philip Pilgrim
Nick Rothwell
Eric Iverson <Eric_I...@objektsynth.com> writes:
> Yes, I'd really prefer a laptop, & the MIDI controllers of my choice.
Me too. So, does this ObjektSynth thing work on laptops?
--
Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects
http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control
"...but you? You've got a monkey on your back: dedication."
Eric Iverson
Nick Rothwell wrote:
>
> Eric Iverson <Eric_I...@objektsynth.com> writes:
> > Yes, I'd really prefer a laptop, & the MIDI controllers of my choice.
>
> Me too. So, does this ObjektSynth thing work on laptops?
Thanks to Apple's iron grip on their laptop specs (note
there are no PowerBook clones), no not yet. This will
likely change if/when CHRP compatible laptops finally
come to market, and when BeOS for Intel is released.
I'd really prefer a CHRP laptop too, like the kind
Motorola was about to release. :/
--Eric
Richard Geppinger
I haven't tried the Nord yet, but I just got back from playing
the new Korg Z1. Except for a few new sounds, I was disappointed.
jpicard
Unlike most people discussing here what to buy, I OWN a JP8000.
There is no comparison with the AN1x. The JP gives so much room to
explore, right up front, with knobs and sliders that I can spend days
just building new sounds.
The Yamaha doesn't have a rugged feel or as good a sound overall, and
why keep talking about the 8 voice poyphony of the JP? It is a
specialist, and not meant to have GM or multi-timbral capability.
Mark J. Lagace
this is all your opinion, after all, the Yamaha AN1x has been voted best new
synth of the year by Analog Players of America. as well, i like it better --
why do people always try to say the synth they bought was the best. we all
have a different preference. the jp8000 is best for u. the an1x is best for
me. . .
jpicard wrote in message <344033...@worldnet.att.net>...
Nick Rothwell
"Mark J. Lagace" <6m...@qlink.queensu.caNoSpam> writes:
> the Yamaha AN1x has been voted best new
> synth of the year by Analog Players of America.
Who?
hardgeus
NORD> YOU CANT STOP IT...
Dariusz Garncarz
Having worked with a Jp8000, An1x, Nord Lead, and most recently a Microwave2,
I feel that the Microwave is the best of the bunch (heck, I even put money on that! - I picked it up last week).
Pro's - 10 voice / 8 part!
- very nice filters / fat (and can sound like the Microwave 1 filters)
- a pile of envelopes, lfo's, modifiers, - modulation mania
- arpeggiator on each part! - that's 8 arps.
- wavescanning and classic oscillators.
Con's - it's still menu driven (but simillar to the Pulse), but @100 parameters
can be tweaked via MIDI CC's.
Cheers,
Dasz
«» «» «» Philip Pilgrim«» «» «»
Dariusz Garncarz wrote:
> I feel that the Microwave is the best of the bunch (heck, I even put money on that! -
I picked it up last week).
Also the synth has just been given FM capabilities. Since their new MWII
synth is software based, new improvements and features seem to be added
weekly. The latest OS is available online so downloading
it is easy. (It is just a midi file that plays into your mwII through
any sequencer)
note: unlike some korg products, a bad transfer is cured by re-doing the
transfer again...not
shipping the synth back to the factory.
As well, the Waldorf engineers are real humans who frequently drop in on
the Microwave Users Group
with support and insight on their products. As well they often implement
requests that we (the end users)
put forward. A great company! (FM modulation, Chorus Effect, ganging
Pulses...etc are all user suggestions)
Best synth in the world....best synth company in the world:
http://www.waldorf-gmbh.de/waldorf/
Philip
--
Philip Pilgrim The Lab Audio Works
5 Evan's Drive - Analog/Digital Recording/Processing
Hammonds Plains - Computer/Synth Interfacing
Nova Scotia, Canada - Hardware/Software Development
B4B 1M8
Phone +1.902.835.7844
<<<NEW EMAIL ADDRESS>>> the...@sprint.ca