KVR Audio

randyandyvandaman · Post by **randyandyvandaman** » Mon Jan 02, 2012 3:29 am

U-he says he doesn't like to do marketing.

I guess he doesn't have to. You fanboys do it for him.

He brings out something new every year.

Yesterdays zebra, Ace is tomorrow's DIva.

Yes he is prolific but as some others have pointed out a little bit same old, same old.

Cheers

mcnoone · Post by **mcnoone** » Mon Jan 02, 2012 3:36 am

randyandyvandaman wrote: Yes he is prolific but as some others have pointed out a little bit same old, same old.

No...I confirm your comment there is completely false.
Really...a coke can and some tin foil, is all you need?
Thanks for the advice.

randyandyvandaman · Post by **randyandyvandaman** » Mon Jan 02, 2012 3:51 am

Mate I know what you'd be using the coke can and foil for.

You gotta stop doing party cones as it's impairing your judgement.

Cheers

Syncretia · Post by **Syncretia** » Mon Jan 02, 2012 4:04 am

i would simply not be able to pay $1000 unless it represented an investment into a controller or dedicated DSP.

Yeah, but this thread is about analog vs. Diva. I just want to know if you were forced to decide between one of analog synths that you really like, and Diva, what would you choose?

right now it is a tough call if DIVA can nail every expensive analog board that it tries to

It doesn't have to nail every synth. It doesn't even have to nail one. The only real question is whether it's up there with other great analog synths.

I have never seen such fanboijism over software than from you lovers of URS software.

I'm a certified non-fanboy. I started a thread on Zebra Vs. Arturia stuff and came to the conclusion that Zebra doesn't provide enough analoginess as compared to some of the Arturia synths. I don't own any of Urs' other synths and I probably won't buy Zebra until most of the bits and pieces in Diva end up in Zebra. It's not that I don't like Zebra, but Diva just @#$#ing nailed it!

What a lot of people forget about synths is that it's not just about pumping out a great sound, it's also about pumping out a great sound that mixes well with other instruments/sounds. In my personal opinion - and I don't know why this is - but analog sounds always mix well with other instruments. Perhaps it's the more organic aspect of the sound - I don't know. Anyway, what's truly great about Diva is how well it mixes with other sounds. I've written about 3 songs and 5 bits and pieces since the beta came out, and each one of them has multiple instances of Diva. Honestly, since I got hold of Diva, I've actually been writing music a lot faster because it's so damn easy to get a sound that sits well in the mix. Sorry to say this, but I never got that from Zebra.

pdxindy · Post by **pdxindy** » Mon Jan 02, 2012 4:51 am

randyandyvandaman wrote:
Yes he is prolific but as some others have pointed out a little bit same old, same old.

I've read at least half a dozen comments from people saying they thought Diva is the best sounding synth they have heard who also don't particularly like Zebra. And Diva is the first u-he synth that models specific analog synths. And all the main u-he synths are distinctly different from each other.

I think your comment that Diva is just same old same old does not hold up to any scrutiny.

pdxindy · Post by **pdxindy** » Mon Jan 02, 2012 5:00 am

Kruddler wrote:
What a lot of people forget about synths is that it's not just about pumping out a great sound, it's also about pumping out a great sound that mixes well with other instruments/sounds. In my personal opinion - and I don't know why this is - but analog sounds always mix well with other instruments. Perhaps it's the more organic aspect of the sound - I don't know. Anyway, what's truly great about Diva is how well it mixes with other sounds. I've written about 3 songs and 5 bits and pieces since the beta came out, and each one of them has multiple instances of Diva. Honestly, since I got hold of Diva, I've actually been writing music a lot faster because it's so damn easy to get a sound that sits well in the mix. Sorry to say this, but I never got that from Zebra.

It's great that Diva suits you so well... and of course if you don't find Zebra inspiring, really no point to use it... However, since lots of people do find it inspiring and that it fits in their music, that is a personal experience, not something that is objective or can be generalized. That Zebra has been used extensively in a number of major hollywood movies also attests to its ability to fit in with other instruments. Thankfully there are lots of different synths for lots of different people and interests.

ford442 · Post by **ford442** » Mon Jan 02, 2012 5:02 am

here is one thing - having an analog to me represents a bit of history and culture. to some it probably signifies a status of having attained success and sometimes having that physical object and using it on stage is a feeling that cannot be replicated digitally. or in the studio having the physical knobs, keys and control over those physical analogs is worth something beyond what a non-physical VST can ever do. am i right? over the years i have felt a certain joy in using physical, portable, non-computerized synths that software almost never has given me. even the Korg Electribe EA-1 was more enjoyable an experience for years than many of the pricey softwares that i own now.

so, i think that people will still want analog hardware. the price will not go down just because there is one or two VSTs that rival the sound quality. however, i could see Diva making some other VAs seem very obsolete.

djshire · Post by **djshire** » Mon Jan 02, 2012 5:07 am

No piece of software will rival the feel of twiddling knobs nor the sound of true analog.

But if you're making music, only you and the hardcores will give a toss....

mcnoone · Post by **mcnoone** » Mon Jan 02, 2012 5:24 am

ford442 wrote:am i right? over the years i have felt a certain joy in using physical, portable, non-computerized synths that software almost never has given me. even the Korg Electribe EA-1 was more enjoyable an experience for years than many of the pricey softwares that i own now.

Most of us use hardware controllers (keyboards) to control software synthesizers.
I see no difference. They have knobs and levers too.
Most of us cannot afford to buy and maintain classic hardware synths either.
Even if it can't replace the physical aspects, which a good controller can do.
Someday, the sound of analogue hardware synths will be replicated using computers, to an almost perfect degree.
It's not a question of if, but when.
The analogue sound fan club, will lose this argument "eventually".
Technological advancement is a strange thing.
It has always done what many said couldn't be done.

randyandyvandaman · Post by **randyandyvandaman** » Mon Jan 02, 2012 5:27 am

Last two posts pretty well sum it up for me to.

You're either an analogue knob twiddler or a software mouse fiddler.

Cheers

Ingonator · Post by **Ingonator** » Mon Jan 02, 2012 8:07 am

I am only able to compare Diva to my Moog Slim Phatty and if i use no or only a slight amount of filter overload (=saturation/overdrive) in the Slim Phatty they sound very similar, maybe the Sli Phatty is a bit better in the low frequencies. If turn up the filter overload of the Slim Phatty it will blow Diva out of the water...
This could be compensated a bit with an external Drive FX like e.g. Schwa Oligarc Drive.

Here is a comparison i had done at the beginning of the public beta of Diva (zip includes WAV file):
https://rapidshare.com/files/1098043213 ... son_02.zip

At the beginning you hear Diva and a t 1:32 the Moog Slim Phatty starts. The Slim Phatty used 20% of filter overload.
At this comparison you have to remember that Diva recreates a Minimoog and no Slim Phatty so a difference was expected. Anyway you could get an idea how Diva sounds compared to a real analog synth.

I really love Diva but at the moment i don't feel like i really have to sell my Slim Phatty.

I soon want to recreate some of the presets i had done for the Slim Phatty with Diva. Maybe i'll post more demos then.

randyandyvandaman wrote:Last two posts pretty well sum it up for me to.

You're either an analogue knob twiddler or a software mouse fiddler.

Cheers

I use an editor software to program the Moog Slim Phatty quite often. Which category is that? An "analog mouse fiddler" maybe?

Ingo

D N A · Post by **D N A** » Mon Jan 02, 2012 9:56 am

Amazing - especially low notes. Well, soft synths are soft synths - no matter what you'll tell, a single C note from analog kills 99,9 % of soft synths.
The questions is: do you need such "details" in the mix. if you don't need then trading this for typical soft synth pros (multi instances, 30 "synths" into small laptop etc.) is still a good option.

ps. but of course soft synths are getting closer and closer ...

izonin · Post by **izonin** » Mon Jan 02, 2012 10:18 am

Diva is a u-he product, but the sound engine wasn't designed by Urs. The osc's and filters are the work of his new genius employee. That guy knows what he's doing.

mcnoone · Post by **mcnoone** » Mon Jan 02, 2012 10:34 am

izonin wrote:Diva is a u-he product, but the sound engine wasn't designed by Urs. The osc's and filters are the work of his new genius employee. That guy knows what he's doing.

Fritze · Post by **Fritze** » Mon Jan 02, 2012 10:50 am

EvilDragon wrote:I see no fanboyism here. Just a great product.

This.

Diva Vs. Real Analog