quote:

---

Originally posted by REiREi:
Michael, does this version has the 48k Tuning bug? Or have u guys already sorted this bug out?

BTW, your order page says the product is QuadraSID 6581 : )

---

All these bugs are sorted out. I've checked it with 11,025 kHz up to 96 kHz and it neither goes out of tune, nor do the filters get instable.

The product page has to be updated, thanks for the info

Cheers,
Mike

quote:

---

Originally posted by catch-22:
Cant seem to get the demo working in Orion Pro,
it says "Vst Plugin junox2.dll cant be loaded!".

---

quote:

---

All these bugs are sorted out. I've checked it with 11,025 kHz up to 96 kHz and it neither goes out of tune, nor do the filters get instable.

---

Well. That's Great!

ShareIt should be processing my orders by now...
(I nearly ordered the last version, but that system would not authorised because I was "too far away from my registered address" - which i was...) <- better stop here b4 it stirs up anything...

Now I just wish that future versions could import Juno1/2/MKS50 Sysex, then i can really set the real Junos aside...

quote:

---

Originally posted by bajongo:

I was sitting right here again where I sit all the time when being at home in front of my puter. No really: there were a few annoying things in the first release like no Attack slider, ugly GUI, slider movement bugs and me being not sure if this thingy will mature because this is the first VSTi that comes from Feilei. Now that Michael from reFX is backing this thing up I trust in this instrument and it improved a lot in my eyes. Therefor I spoke up now but I loved the sound when it was first released.

And yes, I love scandals. (No no, that was a JOKE!)

---

Haha! Yes i too noticed the fact that the sliders didnt visually move when you automated parameters in the origonal demo, also the missing attack parameter seemed pointless(why leave it out?) etc. I didnt mind the gui so much, although it was a little unpolished. What my problem IS with this synth, is that just one voice (with spread control even turned off) can take several hundred megahertz of cpu resource, and there is NO polyphony control. That is/was obviously not a problem in the demo(s) which are mono(and now duo)phonic, however with the INSANE (especially considering the power one voice takes to run) 128 note polyphony of the synth, it basically automatically becomes a headache synth/uncontrollable resource hog from hell, because any time you will play/program fast repeating notes, or just have very long release times, then you are going to have a basically unlimited number of voices overlapping, basically throwing half of your cpu out the window (even if it's a newer one).

Who the hell, first of all, would EVER use 128 voices of polyphony with ONE instance of this synth? I couldnt find a way to use that many voices with 8INSTANCES! no cpu on the market could even process that amount of voices on this in realtime! Secondly, even if you have the most powerful cpu, the reason you have it is so you can use more instruments at once, etc, so it still dosent make any sense to have no polyphony limiter, even if the system can handle 32 voices of it, because you obviously want to have as much cpu overhead as possible to work in. I personally usually NEVER need more than 8 voice poly in a synth, in most the time i use from 1-6 voices, depending on how important the polyphony is for the part.

The point here is, that for a powerful system, leaving this synth without polyphony control, is at best reckless, and at the least, disastrous!
Another point would be, that while people with slower systems, say under 1ghz, while being able to run the DEMO just fine with some other synths, would (when using full version) suddenly be faced with horrible cpu consumption and spikes at best, at the worst, they could not use it at all, due to overlapping notes causing overload, or just be able to use it and no other significant instruments. I probobly wouldnt be making such a case for this, if it at least had a MONO mode.. but, from everything i can see and know, it dosent. *sigh*

Anyway, in case noone has realized it yet, in order for this plugin to be useable in any practical way, it needs to have a polyphony number control. People have to be able to make ANY plugin, as light on their cpu as possible, while still having it perform in the way they are needing in a specific part or context!
It would be good if it also has a MONO button, which causes the synth to behave in a LEGATO way, ie, without envelope retriggering.

MANY people have asked for portamento/glide, which i also want on it, but it's not a necessity like this and i assume will be only implemented on the "pro" version. Either way, both of the versions call for a poly limiter as a matter of course.

I am not trying to be criticizing anyone here, i am just attempting to illustrate my point clearly enough that it is understood. Michael /and/or Feilei,please implement poly control in junox2
And i really really like the new gui. The filters and oscillators of this synth are incredible, and so i understand why it takes such cpu power. But, i think it will sell a lot more to people, if we have more control over what it can gobble down.

p.s. i have not bought it yet, i have been wanting to, but i just know i cant use it in an arrangement as is. Even when i upgrade to a faster system, which is coming before long, i will still need to allocate voices to instruments as needed, etc.

hi emef

you wrote
"when it was first released it was connected to dash synthesis..........i thought it was a reaktor instrument......i didn`t realize it was a vsti"
Yeah man, me too, i totally overlooked that it said VSTi at first, because it was a dash product, i assumed it was a reaktor ensemble.
Arent i a dummy! This forum is great.

Cheers all, bojango, emef, feilei, mr. kleps, everyone else.

quote:

---

Originally posted by exponent:
Where in the hell were you guys the first time this was released? It's re-released and suddenly everyone appreciates its sound? Maybe it's true that scandal invites success. haha just joking but it is kinda funny.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by swayzak:
I've just tried the demo - sounds wonderfully fat.

However, it's not responding to MIDI CC controllers e.g. 74 for Fc.

Is this a demo limitation ?

swayzak

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mozzer:

quote:

---

---

I think you missed this one Michael!!

Cheers,

Moz Morris

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mozzer:

quote:

---

I'm still confused here!

Dash guys posted the other day that they were gonna refund everybody that bought it through Clickbank (I think). I paid for the $49 version when it first came out. So who is going to support with updates? I gather there was a 1.2 from what was on the front page of KVR the other day. So are the existing users/purchasers getting the new versions now from reFX?

Enquiring minds want to know!

Cheers,

Moz Morris

---

I think you missed this one Michael!!

Cheers,

Moz Morris

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by afx23:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mozzer:

quote:

---

---

I think you missed this one Michael!!

Cheers,

Moz Morris

---

He's ignoring , just like when i asked if all the involved parties were happy with the outcome of this ;]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by kevvvvv:
The demo tunes are good.

Did you do them, Michael?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by drEddz@hm:
..the mac version

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Kleps from reFX:
Problem is that it's predecessor was unuseable. It was not working with another samplerate than 44100, it was not multi-instance capable (you could only load ONE for your whole song), the filters where instable (up to the point they would look up and produce only clicking as output etc.) The first demos had abysmal limitations (mono, noise every few seconds etc.) so I guess the new GUI, the bugfixes and the good demo versions make it a lot more worthwhile for the people to check it out.

Cheers,
Mike

---

Oh, yes, i wasnt one of the ones who noticed the samplerate problem, but that woulda sure been a turnoff huh I didnt notice the one instance thing either, boy that could sure bite ya in a bad place haha

I also never had that problem with the filters breaking up and turning to dead output, but i know exactly what type of behaviour you are referring too, i have noticed it in an algorithm in the Zapfilter2 which i picked up the other day, ouch. The reason it sucks (other than the obvious lack of function) that is because it crashes the host often(i'm not talking about zapfilter itself, the plug is incredible, just this type of filter breakup in specific). The filters in orion's tomcat module also do that, it's very annoying, i think it's slipped through because not many people use that generator. Back on topic, i didnt use the origonal demo until it had the noise removed, so i got to really hear the range of the instrument. Once again i think you've done a really good job of "rescuing" the junox, all things considered.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mozzer:
Hi Michael,

I haven't heard anything directly from Dash about this only what was posted on this board.

So as a registered user - how do I go about getting my update?

I've not heard from you either! <g>

Moz Morris

---