Does any one have the chance to compare these two Nordlead clones? Is there a good reason to pay 100$ for Discovery when there is a free Synth1?

TG

I wouldn't buy discovery.....grab synth1 and the presets we have here.
100$ is to much IMHO for discovery

I chose synth1 over Discovery since it fits my needs more than adequately, but IMO the quality of sound of Discovery + the ability to import Nord presets makes Discovery worth the money. Depends on your budget and needs.

prog

Thanks MH! I really like Synth1 very much but no news from Japan for a long time... I start to be anxious!

progfusion74 wrote:

I chose synth1 over Discovery since it fits my needs more than adequately, but IMO the quality of sound of Discovery + the ability to import Nord presets makes Discovery worth the money. Depends on your budget and needs. prog

What about CPU? Synth1 was quite easy on that...

Discovery is quite a CPU hog, but I have a pretty powerful machine now (xp2000+, 512 MB Ram), so I don't really look at CPU much these days. My older machine would have been brought to its knees by Discovery.

Oops! I hope they find a way to improve efficiency. I'm on P4 2000 but couldn't yet overcome my CPU stress.

I purchased Discovery when it first came out. Since version 1.3 (latest) it has been very stable, and doesn't eat the cpu as much. I'm using a P4 2gig with 512 megs of ram. I have used Synth 1 also since it first appeared, but not as much since development stopped... Discovery has some very useful features that I really like: The tempo sync is a menu item, that can be turned off and on, and you can sync LFO or delay or both... The Nord patches along with the built in delay and chorus make a huge amount of potential sounds to draw from! I have created some really nice banks of sounds from the Nord presets that I can load for whatever I need. The sounds are pretty complex and you can create some really cool rythmic stuff, as well as FX. The developers have been very responsive to e-mails too, which I appreciate... Hey I love it, and I have a lot of stuff, including: Absynth, FM7, Electron, Tau Pro, RMIII, DeltaIII, Albino, Beast, Synth 1, Crystal, Ganymead, all the Orion Generators, Space Synth all MHC stuff, Hmmm... Dr008, LM4 MkII, Alpha 2K, damn, I got stop buying this stuff!

Godzilla vs King Kong.

That was a classic battle.

7XL.

7XL wrote:

Godzilla vs King Kong. That was a classic battle. 7XL.

A battle of faking E.T.

Aaargh! It's "King Kong vs. Godzilla," not "Godzilla vs. King Kong!" Please!

I am in love with discovery but I don't own it yet.


dw

So what are the major differences between the two (besides the price, obviously)? Can the Discovery make a lot of sounds that synth 1 can't, and does it sound that much better?

mistertoast,

I'm so sorry.

My bad.

7XL.

I always enjoyed Spy vs. Spy!!!

Synth 1 is buggy, and the developer has disappeared.

- Volume jumps up to near full in SX after full stop

- Sync is not in sync, not with LFOs nor ARPs

- Poor MIDI implementation

Shame, as Synth1 does sound spectacular in comparison to any virtual synth.

I want to know what happen to the developer??????
Synth 1 has a strong potential to crush other free and comercial soft synth´s. I read a lot of theories about the disappearance of Ichiro Toda...,
but no official statement by Ichiro himself.

I think discovery is quite to expensive.... ok ok nl patches and a great sound.
But it is cpu intensive compared to synth 1 or other comercial synths in
that price range(PENTAGON 1)....

I think pentagon beat discovery in sound and optimization (Cpu).
If you dont need the nl2Import, then choose synth1(free) or pentagon,
which costs the same. Sorry DiscoDSP, but 99$, hmmm.

Greetings

pakana wrote:

Synth 1 is buggy, and the developer has disappeared. - Volume jumps up to near full in SX after full stop - Sync is not in sync, not with LFOs nor ARPs - Poor MIDI implementation Shame, as Synth1 does sound spectacular in comparison to any virtual synth.

I've had ZERO problems with Synth1.

I've had some problems with Synth1 too, some serious clicks coming out of it in some presets. Even with filter down at zero there's clicks. Zooming in on the clicks in a wave editor, it looks like it suddenly skips an audio buffer or something.

Also, when it's working, I find synth1 a bit digital - although I'm quite convinced that it is not humanly possible to create a synth with better sound and lower cpu load. Turning on the tempo delay and the phaser unit makes all that digital harshness go away, though.

Synth 1 is not exactly a clone of Nordlead Hardware it just have some identical aspect of the gear...Discovery has a more professional (less "plastic" sound) and can load the original Nordlead patche even if It doesn't sound exactly the same + U can load 4 patch of nordlead for creating one preset : so
Synth 1 is quite good if U don't have monney & want to have some nordlead style sounds.
Discovery is a bit more professional and have this "hardware warmth sound quality" that we love.
It's an affair of taste only tour ears can choose
For myself I use both Synth1 for the basses & Discovery for the Leads and pads....

Hope it helps

AD80 wrote:

I've had ZERO problems with Synth1.

Which host? Could this originate from the way my SX/MIDI clock/ whatever source for sync info is set up?

The arpeggios of Synth1 drift out of time, as it is with the LFOs when "Tempo" sync button is pressed down. OK, the arp is quite limited so never mind that, but tempo synced LFOs can be really effective as I've learned with Crystal (which stays in sync with Cubase).

And as it is such a wonderful synth for leads (ahhh... the EQ knobs ), it would benefit from the possibility to use hardware knobs while playing.

Is the Discovery developer still around. I know from the Nord Modular Yahoo group that one of the major providers of online patches for the Lead 2 could not get a responce from the Discovery developer. It seems the Discovery site is/was linking to the dowload section of another website without any type of credit or even communication with the web site developers.

Robert

From the users group after the group was spammed about Discovery.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I didn't tried it yet, 'cause I don't use VST.
Anyway, they link (advert) for Patches to the Clavia User Site, without
any comment, so since it is the work of Ico and me and they didn't react
to me mail about the issue, this weekend the NordLead Patches Page will
be closed, I'm afraid. Their attitude doesn't show any Nettiquette.

Wout
(Who has a problem: wants to do things for free for people who do things
free too; not for those who want to make money)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Deep linking is pretty common. Netiquette is pretty hazy on it. The web is all about linking. If the page says something like "please don't link directly to this download page" people usually won't.

It would be a shame if the patches get removed. They are a fantastic resource--to Nord as well as Discovery users.

Besides the oscillator(s) synthesis quality (synth1 seems to use pretty badly aliased oscillators, however SYNTH1 is a VERY GOOD synthesizer and very suitable for low-end cpu's, also is freeware), Discovery also has build-in multilayering and morphing. Of course, in Synth1 or any instrument u can always simulate multilayering using plugins like the excelent Chainer, also some hosts also allow 'morphing' of parameters, wich could add that morph ability to Synth1 or any VSTi.

Discovery uses pure-sine bandlimited waveshaping for oscillator synthesis wich takes more cpu than plain wavetable synthesis, and some "composed" waveforms (saw <- made of tri+sqr, and pwm <- made of 2 saws) takes higher cpu usage, since waveforms with this waveshaping technique only can synthesize waveforms with odd harmonics.

I would suggest Synth1 for low cpu users and Discovery for >2Ghz users wich needs higher quality and money to spend obviously.

Btw: We did agreement to the nord2 patches site owner, and all those NL2 patch-makers received a full copy of Discovery some time ago.

Discovery is not a NordLead2 clone or emulator, it just aproximation of the Clavia's red beast and based on its synthesis scheme.

Hi DiscoDsp

Any plans to make mac version of Discovery?????

Greetings

We're studying this right now, also develop of course some other gear for MAC / OSX platform.

The problem about a direct Discovery port is i'm really afraid that current G4's speed (maybe dual) cant handle CPU benchmark to allow a decent usage of the instrument.

1Ghz is not suitable or pretty short for this plugin (no matter wich platform, Apple or PC).

>>>also some hosts also allow 'morphing' of parameters, wich could add that morph ability to Synth1 or any VSTi.


Which host can do that?

Okay, just my two-cents....

Synth 1 is free and you just cant go wrong with that. The price tag for Discovery is a bit high but it's still reasonable. Now as far as sound quality...IMHO Discovery beats the crap out of Synth 1 hands down. Dont get me wrong, Synth 1 has some fat presets and tweakability options but it's nothing compared to Discovery.

As far as stability, I run both plugs on a 500mhz and 900mhz PIII and I have not yet had one problem with either.

If both had a similar price tag, I would definately go for Discovery.

>>also some hosts also allow 'morphing' of parameters, wich could add that morph ability to Synth1 or any VSTi.

Chainer, for one, allows that.

Arguru,

Are you still planning to allow importing of patches from other synths? If so, which ones? Nord Rack? Other Nord Leads besides NL2? Other synths from other manufacturers?

pakana wrote:

AD80 wrote: I've had ZERO problems with Synth1. Which host? Could this originate from the way my SX/MIDI clock/ whatever source for sync info is set up? The arpeggios of Synth1 drift out of time, as it is with the LFOs when "Tempo" sync button is pressed down. OK, the arp is quite limited so never mind that, but tempo synced LFOs can be really effective as I've learned with Crystal (which stays in sync with Cubase). And as it is such a wonderful synth for leads (ahhh... the EQ knobs ), it would benefit from the possibility to use hardware knobs while playing.

Hay wassup Pakana. My set-up is Cubase 5.0/SX, Pentium IV 2.8ghz, Windows XP.

I havent had any problems with Synth1 but I see many people have so it must be buggy. Too bad the developer disapeared (or got snatched up by some Japanese company). Hopefully he comes back and fixes the bugs some day.

mistertoast wrote:

>>also some hosts also allow 'morphing' of parameters, wich could add that morph ability to Synth1 or any VSTi. Chainer, for one, allows that.

I just checked the morphing of chainer with several synth. It is not comparable to the discovery morphing. It crackles and is not smooth at all. Tried it with rhino, discovery, albino and FM7.
Discovery-morphing is alot of fun.
It would be even better if you could see ghostcontrols follow the morphing and could save a morphed state into a new preset

I haven't tried the morphing in Chainer in real-time. I have only used it to create new presets from old ones.

Seems like real-time morphing could be great. I'll have to try it in Discovery.

Despite the fact that Synth 1 has some obvious issues (sync issues and some aliasing issues), I still use it more than Discovery because it's a dream to program and looks lovely. Not something I can say about Discovery. Creating, browsing patches is a nightmare, somewhat high cpu usage in comparison, the interface looks fairly dull. If anything, the Disco guys should take a hint or two from Synth 1 as far as usability and customizability goes, because you cannot go wrong with such an approach.

I love how in synth one you can see a numerical display of each component rather than just guess "oh that's 50%", not to mention the fact if you right click on the knobs you can use the mousewheel.

Again I'd rather use Synth 1 with a few problems it has over Discovery anyday.

That's my 2 cents.

I love the sound of discovery, but what's put me off buying it (besides lack of $) is the cpu consumption, and I say that but still use crystal and zeta3
same with rhino.

I just tried the Discovery demo. I am using it on my AMD XP 1600+ with the MME version and it is far from being a CPU hog. Does take between 10 and 20% on most patches. I found the sound warm and much clearer than synth1. The patches provided with it are excellent. I wish there could be somekind of synth1 import because I really like some synth1 patches. I have enough of Synth1 which is very buggy as DXi and as VSTi in Sonar. I don't know why the tempo sync is not working anymore on my setup
If discovery were few bucks less I would not hesitate to purchase it.

Discovery is excellent. It has a really sharp sound. I've been feeding it through Greasetube and Ambience to dirty it up! I would already have Discovery if it were $50. $100 is harsh for me. I'm pretty convinced that I'm going to eventually have to $$$ it, though.

mistertoast wrote:

Discovery is excellent. It has a really sharp sound. I've been feeding it through Greasetube and Ambience to dirty it up! I would already have Discovery if it were $50. $100 is harsh for me. I'm pretty convinced that I'm going to eventually have to $$$ it, though.

Maybe can the DiscoDSP guys do a special price for Kvr-Vst users ?

same for me, great synth but too expensive.
I would say 50 to 70 would be a nice deal, but 100...

I kind of understand the pricing. If you price at $50, you don't have the cachet of a product priced at $100. People might not take it as seriously.

I'm not sure if it sounds like a Nord, but I do know that I like the sound when it plays the Nord patches. With over 1000 patches (and I've tried many of them), I see this synth as being as valuable as one of the Native Instruments synths.

Synth1 is wonderful too. It just doesn't quite "cut" like Discovery. Not quite as bright. For many jobs, though, it's just fine. I'm tempted to write a patch converter to go between the two. I can see passing off some of the duties of Discovery over to Synth1 just to reduce the processor load.

I think at $70 they would have at least 3 new customers and I would take it for sure at $100 if it got Synth1 patch import hehe

If they put it at $75 for KvR users in April only, I'd jump in.

Wow, just tried out the demo of Discovery and I have to say that I'm really really impressed. The ability to 'layer' up to 4 patches into one patch opens up so many doors for sound creation. Some of the sounds were definitely within the scope and range of Synth1, while others were most defintely far out of it. The cpu usage was a little high here (on an athlon 1600+), but nothing too crazy. Definitely at a usable level. Overall, I'd have to say big respect to the DiscoDSP guys for making a good sounding instrument (I would much rather have it this way than have another 'typical sounding' VA instrument that was lighter on the cpu).

"pure-sine bandlimited waveshaping for oscillator synthesis"

What the hell is that thing ?

I know how bandlimited oscillators and waveshaping work... but this... Is this just a marketing term ?
And what is a "pure-sine" ? Do we have "impure-sine" also ?

Nicolas

Don't drink, don't smoke.
100$ is nothing for discovery compared to all the poison and bull we spend money for.

Freeware ususally stops developing unless it is promotion for a commercial synth. The more the developer gets the more he can afford to invest into new features.

Can anyone tell me how to load new banks into synth 1? I downloaded some banks from kvr and extracted them into synth 1s soundbanks, but all I'm getting is the initial sound on every preset. Am I missing something here?

Hi TG,

I have tried both a fair amount, sure Synth1 is nice but for me
Discovery wins hands down. imho it sounds richer, much nicer GUI, 100's more sounds.. the fact that it loads up nord patches makes this a preset dream.

freq updates and GREAT support make it a total winner. sure some patches are cpu heavy but so are most synths of this high standard.

re:the price.. to me $99 is a GREAT price.. compare that to something like the ohmboys fx. (150$for a filter) and you will what I mean.

also check out Disco Dsp's fx. Trill Me is WONDERFULL!!


great work guys.

respect
topaz

gassle wrote:

Does any one have the chance to compare these two Nordlead clones? Is there a good reason to pay 100$ for Discovery when there is a free Synth1? TG

Well, I read everybody's comments, got excited, downloaded the Discovery demo with $100 burning in my pocket and then............WHAMO!

This thing crushed my poor Athlon XP1700+. I had one pad sound utilize up to 70% of my CPU. I tried to run the CPU meter in XP and my ASIO overloaded every time.

It is such a huge shame because the sounds I heard in the presets were completely awesome. Spectacular basses.

Another shame is that Logic has that CPU saving freeze function in 6.0 but no way am I buying a MAC. Don't have those kind of bucks hanging around.

My initial impression is that the sounds were clearer on Discovery vs Synth1 and I've used Synth1 extensively FWIW.

Hmmm... I have a P4 2.0 with 512 megs of ram, and I've got a couple of songs with 3 instances of Discovery and some Orion instruments, going at about 30-50%? I'm not experiencing these hits like some of the people have said. Generally, with 2-3 note pads it's running 8-15%, and 4 note chords around 20%. Basses are typical. Maybe it doesn't like the Athlon?

Earlier versions were hogs. Some patches are hogs.

Chemik wrote:

This thing crushed my poor Athlon XP1700+. I had one pad sound utilize up to 70% of my CPU. I tried to run the CPU meter in XP and my ASIO overloaded every time.

Have you installed MMX or SSE version? I think Athlon XP supports SSE.

Update: Cause SSE version saves about 5% CPU per Voice.

Hey all, I'm the one who started the first thread about Discovery's price and I'll say this much, at first I really wasn't sure (especially with release 1.0) now that the CPU consumption has gone down considerably and I've had time to play with the demo (thanks for the great demo Raul and co, it's nice that I can still use it) that Discovery will probably be the next VSTi I buy as soon as I get some cash together. I mean really the thing does sound fantastic, and though it may not be a Nord clone per-se it certainly has that Nord sound that I've heard all over Wilco's last two records, REMs last album, etc, and just sounds amazing. IMO there's no comparison to Synth1, which I really think is by far the most over-rated VSTi on the scene (Iblit being the most under-rated). Synth 1 sounds dark (no shiny high end) doesn't sync properly on most systems, is a bit combursome in regards to programing, and just alaises. Discovery is crystal clear, falling somewhere perfectly in between analog and digital (just modern), has amazing filters, and a great feature set (Raul please let us select oscs and filters with the mouse though, my only complaint right now that isn't CPU related). Is it a CPU hog? Yes a bit, but at times I've been wishing I had the cash for it, because the sounds it makes are worth bouncing down to audio to get around the CPU issues. I also expect that we will see even more improvements to the CPU. In this case (Discovery vs Synth1) the addage of you get what you pay for really holds true, I love it when it doesn't, but I can't see anyone honestly thinking Synth1 sounds better (and really that's what it comes down to, and something I'm willing to pay for). Rauls, you'll have my money as soon as I'm working again (or get paid for a project I'm working, on whichever comes first); unless of course you want to bring on board as a betatester or something which I'd volunteer for in a second .

I find it to be the opposite, granted that Synth-1 has some aliasing issues, it's capable of producing some sounds that Discovery isn't. Discovery is capable of producing some really high quality sounds, but judging from all the NL2 material I've heard in trance tracks, and by my own productions, Synth-1 can reproduce some sounds more true to the real NL2 than Discovery.

I find that programming in Synth-1 is simply a dream come true. It has to be the most customizable and easy to edit VSTI I've seen to date.

All in all both synths are very capable, any true NL2 enthusiast will use BOTH and not one, because each is capable of producing its own array of sounds.

>>Iblit being the most under-rated.

I'll agree with that. The author of IBlit told me in an email he was working on a polysynth, but I haven't heard anything about it since. I'm hoping he blows my socks off.

Discovery is my #1 desired commercial synth now. I've got everything I want except for that and the guitar synths (Revitar and Slayer). And maybe M-Tron.

>>Iblit being the most under-rated.

I just "layered" these two couple of days ago Synth1 in poly mode providing chords, while Iblit screams with 3 detuned oscs... fed it through Greasetube & Ambience and was _quite_ satisfied with the results. (Not to mention that the whole sound is free )

If you want a big, fat and wild lead sound that's definitely one productive way to go, and all the abovementioned plugs are very CPU-efficient so you could pile them up as many as your taste allows.

Iblit has it's downfalls but they don't have anything to do with the sound, which is pure and deep. Some kind of MIDI implementation is IMO a must on a monosynth.

Quote:

Have you installed MMX or SSE version? I think Athlon XP supports SSE. Update: Cause SSE version saves about 5% CPU per Voice.

I just installed SSE and can see a minor improvement. Now, my big question is what is all of the noise and clipping I'm hearing? Is that because its the demo version? I only get it when I try to do multiple instances. Please tell me its because of the demo because none of the other 50 VSTs I have do this.

Thanks for your help.

Same problem here (im affraid its not demo related, would be a strange limitation

Check your master level. The full version (which is a very good synth) doesn't do any noise or clipping when the levels are correct.

bajongo wrote:

Check your master level. The full version (which is a very good synth) doesn't do any noise or clipping when the levels are correct.

I had already adjusted all of the levels, and balanced Discovery with the other VSTs I was using. I have had to deal with clipping through many recording sessions in the past but addressed it with my current hardware configuration...except with Discovery.

The clipping happens the very second I open up another instance of Discovery in Logic 5.51. I don't need to do anything except open it and immediately the noise and clipping starts, even with CPU usage low. The second I replace the instance with another VST, the noise goes away.

>>The clipping happens the very second I open up another instance of Discovery in Logic 5.51. I don't need to do anything except open it and immediately the noise and clipping starts, even with CPU usage low.

That's strange. Sounds like maybe a bug.

Funkybot wrote:

....I mean really the thing does sound fantastic, and though it may not be a Nord clone per-se it certainly has that Nord sound that I've heard all over Wilco's last two records, REMs last album, etc, and just sounds amazing. IMO there's no comparison to Synth1, which I really think is by far the most over-rated VSTi on the scene (Iblit being the most under-rated). Synth 1 sounds dark (no shiny high end) doesn't sync properly on most systems, is a bit combursome in regards to programing, and just alaises. Discovery is crystal clear, falling somewhere perfectly in between analog and digital (just modern), has amazing filters, and a great feature set (Raul please let us select oscs and filters with the mouse though, my only complaint right now that isn't CPU related). Is it a CPU hog? Yes a bit, but at times I've been wishing I had the cash for it, because the sounds it makes are worth bouncing down to audio to get around the CPU issues.....

When it comes to most of the classic analog synths from Moog, Yamaha or Korg you won't find that "shiny high end sound" unless you add a little resonance to the sounds, but even then it's different sounding. Well, since the run on the JP8000 (which I don't realy understand) everyone wants to have that kind that sound, don't ppl. use enhancer fx-plug-ins anymore?
You're right when it comes to the filters of the Synth1, they do the job, in fact they're not that good sounding, but compared to the CPU consumptions they're great...
I wouldn't use Synth1 for all the Sounds in a song, I wouldn't have paid a dime for it, at least not by the time it came out. But hey, it's free! So it's not Synth1 or not Synth1 but if Discovery is worth the extra money. Well, if the NL2 import works well and you want or need that feature it probably is, other than that to my ears there are other less CPU consuming and at least as good sounding plug-ins out there. So at the end soundwise it all comes back to ones personal taste ...

Considering your signature, it's no wonder Synth 1 doesn't bother you. Seriously, though, what you consider a more realistic sounding (that was it's not really a subjective issue), less cpu consuming synth?

Summa wrote:

... You're right when it comes to the filters of the Synth1, they do the job, in fact they're not that good sounding, but compared to the CPU consumptions they're great... ...So at the end soundwise it all comes back to ones personal taste ...

I'm definitely over this point: I don't care anymore about CPU consumption. I want the good sound. If a VSTi needs the CPU: OK if it sounds great. And I only have an XP 2000+. So nothing fancy here. I only want the sound.

bajongo wrote:

I'm definitely over this point: I don't care anymore about CPU consumption. I want the good sound. If a VSTi needs the CPU: OK if it sounds great. And I only have an XP 2000+. So nothing fancy here. I only want the sound.

I completely agree. If something is too heavy on my cpu I just bounce it to audio and SHABLAM, I'm set!

Summa, I wasn't trying to say Discovery sounded like an analog synth though, in fact I'd characterize it's sound as sounding somewhere between analog and digital showing more signs of the latter, but that's what I like about it. I heard the same thing about the Nord Lead 2s though: that they're not the most 'analog' sounding synths, but still good, and those are basically my thoughts on Discovery. I like the fact that when I try and create a Discovery patch (even one that doesn't use the FM knob) in Pentagon 1, I may get kinda close to the sound, but never get that real Discovery type sound out of it. With most other VAs P1 can reproduce presets/sounds without much work, and either nail the original sound, or even better it; thus Discovery has it's own unique character, and I want it.

@Funkbot: Well, analog Synths are the reference for subtractive Synths other than that it's hard to say wether a filter is good or weak sounding if you don't have something for comparison. As far as I know digital sounding isn't excatly a compliment for a subtractive synth. I don't know the Sound of the NL2 but had the NL3 at home for some time, which to my ears has much better sounding oscillators with no noticable bandwith reduction. Other than that you would have problems to recreate a Synth1 Sound with the Pentagon as well, probably far more, since the Synth1 is even more "unique" in Sound...

@bajongo: Well sounds like you're using your Computer for Synths only, what about a good reverb? Well, after I put together my last two computers I always thought this one is pretty fast and I don't have to update it for quite a while. Guess what, you'll never have a powerfull enough Computer, the software developer will always find ways to use all the processing power with new and interesting toy... and to my ears the sound of the Discovery filter isn't justifying the consumption, especially when set to resonance...

@Uncle E: I prefere having aliased sound above oscillators that are bandwidth limited to death. But I tested Softsynths with far worse sounding Oscillators compared to the ones used in Discovery ...

Quote:

"...bandwidth limited to death...."

Well I think you're minunderstanding this. The "trick" about bandlimited oscillators is to 'keep' the partials below nyquist frequency, where is set this bandwith limit. Above that frequency rate (Nyquist, wich is samplerate/2), is impossible to create any partial, if you try to do, it'll be reflected and u'll get an aliased partial.

This is like to pretend fit 3 liters of water in a bottle of 2 liters, the remaining liter will just fall away...

No matter what are your sound tastes of preferences, this aliasing type is an issue that is clearly bad, plus the damage cant be resolved in post-processing.

Say do you like aliasing in oscillators is like, in example, some 3d gamer saying that he likes the aliasing produced in a 3d game when the textures contaning high pixel "variance" appears "broken" or distorted when these are rendered very far on the Z axis. (like wires,thin lines, nets, etc). Someone that played 3d fps games surely experienced this in old gfx cards or even playstation, etc =).

Summa wrote:

... @bajongo: Well sounds like you're using your Computer for Synths only, what about a good reverb? Well, after I put together my last two computers I always thought this one is pretty fast and I don't have to update it for quite a while. Guess what, you'll never have a powerfull enough Computer, the software developer will always find ways to use all the processing power with new and interesting toy... and to my ears the sound of the Discovery filter isn't justifying the consumption, especially when set to resonance... ...

Hey Summa,

no I don't use one computer for synths only. But I will use a second one with SystemLink to have more power soon. Until now I just didn't set it up to work like this.
I agree with you that I sure would be able to outmax my next upgrade (what probably will be a AMD hammer something) by using everything in real time.
Obviously you have a certain taste and idea how an analogue synth has to sound. Do you think that a MiniMoog is as analogue as a MS-20? A Prophet-1 as analogue as a CS01 II? I heard a Prophet 5 that sounds horrible and that doesn't stand up to MY taste of analogue.

Discovery: This is a very good sounding synth. I like it. It has a special character on it's own. I'm happy to have these special sounds in my arsenal and they are of technically high quality.

Peace.

Summa, I'm interested to hear which synths you think use less cpu & sound better, not worse. I don't think it's the best sounding thing in the world, but it, the moog modular v, & z3ta+ are the best native synths I've yet tried & the Nord presets suit me more than Albino's.

Anyway, I agree with your comment regarding cpu power, dsp is the true way!

@Uncle E: If I'd be interested in using subtractive softsynths it's the Virsyn Tera that oscillator and filter wise sounds much better to my ears. Unfortunately the presets don't show much of it's power, but I don't use presets anyway.
I haven't tried the z3ta since I'm scared off by the sound of the Pentagon and to prevent to start another bunch of disussion the only thing I'd like to write about the Albino is that Rob has done a great job with the presets...

@bajongo: I know that analog synths do sound different, but there are certain ascpects in sound that are similar for all those analog synth, no matter if it's a Moog, a Sunsyn or the Andromeda or even that cute little CS01...

arguru wrote:

Quote: "...bandwidth limited to death...." Well I think you're minunderstanding this. The "trick" about bandlimited oscillators is to 'keep' the partials below nyquist frequency, where is set this bandwith limit. Above that frequency rate (Nyquist, wich is samplerate/2), is impossible to create any partial, if you try to do, it'll be reflected and u'll get an aliased partial. This is like to pretend fit 3 liters of water in a bottle of 2 liters, the remaining liter will just fall away... No matter what are your sound tastes of preferences, this aliasing type is an issue that is clearly bad, plus the damage cant be resolved in post-processing. Say do you like aliasing in oscillators is like, in example, some 3d gamer saying that he likes the aliasing produced in a 3d game when the textures contaning high pixel "variance" appears "broken" or distorted when these are rendered very far on the Z axis. (like wires,thin lines, nets, etc). Someone that played 3d fps games surely experienced this in old gfx cards or even playstation, etc =).

Well, if you're the programmer of that synth you surely have a problem, when you're reaching the nyquist barrier you already have aliasing since some waveforms are reduced to squares by then...
The trick is that some synth programmers mannage to reduce the aliasing non-audiable and others don't. If you're synth is producing that much load and I still can hear that it's bandwith limited you're internal samplingrate is probably too low and since the discovery isn't quite complex synthesis wise can you tell me what you're doing with all that processing power???... Well, no offense... I would be happy anyway if I'd be programmer enough to create a synth like Discovery...

Check synths like DX7 or PPG and you'll see that aliasing isn't necessarily bad and unless you increase the internal samplingrate immense you'll always have "aliasing" problems with the software version of ringmod and FM and it never will sound like the real thing. That's because you're loosing details that can't be regained anymore...

Well, to suit your game analogy, you might know the nintendo 64 and that for some of the games the faraway view looks quite foogy as if you're looking through a frosted glass. Another analogy might be a high compressed movie where you're missing the details and it almost looks like an animated film. That's excaclty the way some bandwithlimited oscillators sound to my ears. Aliasing artefacts can add much detail to the sound and even work like a texture if used the right way...

Quote:

Well, if you're the programmer of that synth you surely have a problem

Yes, i'm becoming bald and ugly.

Quote:

If you're synth is producing that much load and I still can hear that it's bandwith limited you're internal samplingrate is probably too low and since the discovery isn't quite complex synthesis wise can you tell me what you're doing with all that processing power???...

I just added a bunch of "Sleep()" functions to make CPU stop and make the synth slower, so it can look it's more intensive and complex.

There's a lot of ways per example of create things. Even a simple LFO wich is not something from other planet, can be improved in several ways to improve quality, ie: a *slight lowpassed* ramp-shaped LFO makes "warmer" and more musical modulation than without the filter. This can be applied also to stuff like parameter scaling, and other elements of a "simple" synth.

Quote:

Well, to suit your game analogy, you might know the nintendo 64 and that for some of the games the faraway view looks quite foogy as if you're looking through a frosted glass

Yep, this is called texture-mipmapping. Most synths also works with this wavetable-mipmapping trick (bandlimited wavetables). Discovery doesnt work this way and uses completelly different technique to shape oscillator waveforms.

About aliasing...

Its like having the ability to sample at 8bit/12bits or less then 44khz.
Its not "hi fidelity", but the result can be more interesting.
I understand, as a programmer, that you want aliasing free oscs, but for musicians, its great to have both worlds.
I would be very sad if all programmers would "rework" their oscillators to "remove" alliasing

Wow. I would be THRILLED if synth programmers would spend their time working to eleiminate aliasing. The more time programmers spend on finding new, clever, different ways to produce alias-free synths, the happier I'll be. I need another aliasing synth like I need a hole in my thumb.

Synths can sound plenty interesting and sparkly without aliasing, and I can do my own nasty things to the signal after it comes out of the synth. I, for one, want programmers to keep on working on the problem.

I'm glad that Arguru is doing something different, even if it eats cycles, because it makes Discovery sound different enough for me to covet, and probably eventually buy.

Quote:

Yes, i'm becoming bald and ugly.

Quote:

I just added a bunch of "Sleep()" functions to make CPU stop and make the synth slower, so it can look it's more intensive and complex.

Well, it's your synth, if you say you used Sleep() I have to trust you In the early days of programming we used NOPs for that task

Quote:

There's a lot of ways per example of create things. Even a simple LFO wich is not something from other planet, can be improved in several ways to improve quality, ie: a *slight lowpassed* ramp-shaped LFO makes "warmer" and more musical modulation than without the filter. This can be applied also to stuff like parameter scaling, and other elements of a "simple" synth.

Well, on LFO frequencies that probably costs an immense amount of processing power, hopefully the modulation inputs of the oszillators will updated fast enough as well otherwise I guess this operation would be useless Why don't you create the LFO waveforms at a higher resolution and prefiltered already? Maybe I'm thinking into the wrong direction but if they weren't that steppy in first place there's no need to filter them, isn't it? Nevermind, I'm probably not the right counterpart for discussions like this, since I never programmed my own synth, I stopped audio programming with mixing voices in Assembler on my ATARI ST. Hopefully your new baby will consume less or at least as much as the Discovery, since as a Kawai K5000 user I'm very interested in testing the Vertigo.

Quote:

Yep, this is called texture-mipmapping. Most synths also works with this wavetable-mipmapping trick (bandlimited wavetables).

Hehe, that was just an example to explain how those limited oscillators sound to my ears. Even so the Discovery Oscillators are not bad sounding, but I still hear that something is missing...

Quote:

Discovery doesnt work this way and uses completelly different technique to shape oscillator waveforms.

With or without wavetables?

@easymode
The sounds of my favourite 80s Synths had a certain amount of aliasing artefacts in those days in made them sound quite unique to my ears...

@mistertoast
Aliasing is more than the wistling you hear when playing higher note, it's the noisy character of (for instance) the Lately Bass or it's the very own characteristic of the sounds you find in a lot of 80s LPs like Nik Kershaw - The Riddle, Art of Noise - Daft, Propaganda - A Secret wish and much more...

>>Aliasing is more than the wistling you hear when playing higher note, it's the noisy character of (for instance) the Lately Bass or it's the very own characteristic of the sounds you find in a lot of 80s LPs like Nik Kershaw - The Riddle, Art of Noise - Daft, Propaganda - A Secret wish and much more...

Right, but as I said, there's more than enough aliasing synths. It's easy to make one. I want the other kind.

arguru wrote:

Quote: Well, to suit your game analogy, you might know the nintendo 64 and that for some of the games the faraway view looks quite foogy as if you're looking through a frosted glass Yep, this is called texture-mipmapping. Most synths also works with this wavetable-mipmapping trick (bandlimited wavetables). Discovery doesnt work this way and uses completelly different technique to shape oscillator waveforms.

Hmm, maybe he's talking about the fog produced by depth shading instead of mipmapping (which is not supposed to make things foggy or blurry!)?

Anyways, one thing that Synth 1 does for _me_ that no other soft synth has done up to now, is creating my own patches!

Most of the time I'm browsing through the presets of a synth and if I find something interesting, I'll start tweaking from there... with weak, disappointing results.

But somehow Synth1's gui or structure enables me to create my own patches (even from scratch!) and THAT is the important part for me.

I do like to spend time improving the sound that I created with FX rather than using a better sounding synth that doesn't give me the results that I want in the first place.

Cheers!

cerebral wrote:

So what are the major differences between the two (besides the price, obviously)? Can the Discovery make a lot of sounds that synth 1 can't, and does it sound that much better?

No, it does sound much bader!!