U-No-LX VS Diva

[ObsoleteAcc99]

I actually can't stand the Tal thingy, but that's judging purely on the presets, of which i tested every single one. I don't know how it can even be compared in the same realm as Diva.

That said, if someone has a bank that they believe shows what it is truly capable of, please let me know, as i can't be this wrong when it is loved by so many. I am willing to admit there simply must be something i am missing.

cheers

[bailees7irish]

I actually can't stand the Tal thingy, but that's judging purely on the presets, of which i tested every single one. I don't know how it can even be compared in the same realm as Diva.

That said, if someone has a bank that they believe shows what it is truly capable of, please let me know, as i can't be this wrong when it is loved by so many. I am willing to admit there simply must be something i am missing.

cheers

I smell a u-he fanboy

[digitalboytn]

In the red corner we have TAL and in the blue corner we have u-he...

Wait for the bell boys and then you can slug it out

How many of these X v Y threads do we really need around here ?

All of these pencils have different shades of colour to get the whole picture balanced and into perspective

[djanthonyw]

All of these pencils have different shades of colour to get the whole picture balanced and into perspective

I don't completely agree with this because just how many options does someone need with the difference ends up being so little? Yes, options can be good, but not when we are talking .0000002 of a difference between something you already have. Not really a point in having 20 different tools that essentially do the same thing.

I think I'm just sticking with Diva for this one. I'm really not seeing the benefit of U-No-LX here.

Sure it's simple and focused, and uses less CPU, but the idea of it being simple and focused is pointless when you're adding it to your tool box with one that can already do the same sounds. So now you have two synths that can get you the same thing, but now add up both of there features, and controls and things are just getting more complicated and redundant instead of "simple". About the CPU, Diva can just be run in draft mode and bounced offline at highest quality which will use equal to or less CPU than U-no.

[digitalboytn]

All of these pencils have different shades of colour to get the whole picture balanced and into perspective

I don't completely agree with this because just how many options does someone need with the difference ends up being so little? Yes, options can be good, but not when we are talking .0000002 of a difference between something you already have. Not really a point in having 20 different tools that essentially do the same thing.

I'm not sure that you really understand exactly what I was saying there chief..

Don't worry...It happens all of the time

[daExpert]

All of these pencils have different shades of colour to get the whole picture balanced and into perspective :wink:

I don't completely agree with this because just how many options does someone need with the difference ends up being so little?

I think I'm just sticking with Diva for this one. I'm really not seeing the benefit of U-No-LX here.

As other people have stated. U-No-LX definitely does sound different than Diva, and is the best emulation of a Juno synth you'll find. There is a certain sound character to it that Diva can't exactly replicate. The difference might be subtle, but that difference might be enough to make U-No a valuable addition to your toolbox.

[Uncle E]

is the best emulation of a Juno synth you'll find.

When did this widely become a good thing? I've seen the odd Juno 60 fan over the years but it was certainly never considered as highly as any of the individual synths that DIVA emulates, not even the 106!

[Kriminal]

I actually can't stand the Tal thingy, but that's judging purely on the presets, of which i tested every single one. I don't know how it can even be compared in the same realm as Diva.

That said, if someone has a bank that they believe shows what it is truly capable of, please let me know, as i can't be this wrong when it is loved by so many. I am willing to admit there simply must be something i am missing.

cheers

To be fair, you really need to only compare similar presets that only use juno features. Comparing the two synths 'as is' is pointless.

[urosh]

When did this widely become a good thing?

Don't know, it seems that for some people 60 is pure gold (check this fresh from the press, I was like "1500 for Juno 60??!!??"). Anyway, I personaly don't care how authentic it is (and it is not), my first and last concern is "Do I like its sound? Do I like its UI/workflow?" (for example, don't like Zebra, UI never clicked with me, don's like ACE, sounds way off to my ears, and my fave in Diva is least authenitic Bite MK1).

but not when we are talking .0000002 of a difference between something you already have

That number is waaaaay off IMHO. The more I play it, more differences show up (for example, lead with all waveforms on 11, filter fairly open so that cutoff sweeps trough highmids and HF, reso at 80-90-100% ; nope, Diva can't pull that). It starting to become my goto synth (and, I'm not that fond of both Roland filters in Diva, Korg and Moog is business for me). Now I'm like "$40 is no brainer for this". But,
it's your opinion first and foremost. If you don't hear or care for difference (actually, in 95% of situations people don't care for differences, not that they don't hear them) decision is easy.


BTW, something completely off topic: I picked up pieces of buzz here and there that bunch of people have serious issues/objections to Arturia copyprotection. If somebody could write 5 sentence digest on what's that all about I would be very gratefull.[/quote]

[Lotuzia]

is the best emulation of a Juno synth you'll find.

When did this widely become a good thing? I've seen the odd Juno 60 fan over the years but it was certainly never considered as highly as any of the individual synths that DIVA emulates, not even the 106!

I had both a 106 and a J60. Kept the J60. Never ever regretted my choice.

Then, as I just cant see the point in comparing a Juno 60 and a D model for example, I cant see the point of comparing emulations of them either...

[EvilDragon]

I actually can't stand the Tal thingy, but that's judging purely on the presets, of which i tested every single one. I don't know how it can even be compared in the same realm as Diva.

That said, if someone has a bank that they believe shows what it is truly capable of, please let me know, as i can't be this wrong when it is loved by so many. I am willing to admit there simply must be something i am missing.

cheers

I smell a u-he fanboy

I smell a preset bunny who can't tweak for the life of him.

[fmr]

I sincerely can't understand the point of this comparison. It's like in the old days of the 80s, when people was comparing the SY77 with the D-50.
U-NO-LX is a close emulation of the Juno-60. DIVA is a mix'n match synth that has modules of both the Juno-60 as well as the Jupiter-6, Jupiter-8, Korg MS-20 and Moog Minimoog. U-NO-LX was created for those that miss the Juno-60, and want one emulation that works "exactly" like the real thing. DIVA was created for those that love analogue synthesis and want to explore the different possibilities opened by freely combine (good) elements of several celebrated synths of the past. We can recreate Juno sounds in DIVA, but they will certainly demand more work, and are not so close.
Apple and oranges in my opinion. As someone that has both, I say: GET BOTH. There are not that many points in common.
Besides, if the reason for not having U-NO-LX was the existence of DIVA,then even DIVA would not have appreared, since there are so many good analogue emulations already around. And several appeared after DIVA as well (Saurus and Oxium, for example).

[fluffy_little_something]

If you already own Diva, you are probably familiar with all of its controls already, so one of LX's main advantages - rapid sound design - is no longer there and you know how to get the sound you want, including Juno sounds, on Diva as well.

Now, if you didn't own Diva, I think the LX is great as it is very easy to learn and get good results fast. The interface is really pleasant to work with, even for older musicians who most of all want to make music rather than program complex soundscapes for the mere sake of it. I mean, virtually all modern studios have the greatest software, still most modern music in my view is not very appealing because having the sound potential available alone does not help much. At the end of the day one can't really use great sounding isolated patches as such in a complete song. They have to be pruned and what remains usually doesn't justify a triple-digit dollar synth. It's a bit like with cars. What's the Ferrari good for when there is a 90mph speed limit? A good sedan might provide a more pleasant ride.

I guess it also depends on what kind of music someone makes. For instrumental music sound quality is a bit more important than for vocal music where the attention is mostly on the singer(s). For the latter I think the LX is more than enough, after all thanks to software you can simply combine more than one instance of the same and/or other synths. Being creative in that department gives you sounds you can't even do in Diva.

[Robmobius]

I'm very very happy with the TAL, but then I love the Juno sound.

I had Diva and sold it because I bought a TI2. But then again, I love the Virus sound.

They are both great. Diva will be a better all rounder. But you won't get a better Juno emulator.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

is the best emulation of a Juno synth you'll find.

When did this widely become a good thing? I've seen the odd Juno 60 fan over the years but it was certainly never considered as highly as any of the individual synths that DIVA emulates, not even the 106!

I don't get it either. I've had some playing time with both 60's and 106's (now that I think of it, mostly 106's) and I just don't get the fascination with them. It's like every goth, post-punk, or bad revitalist dance-pop band in the NYC/NENJ area had a 106 circa 2001. The reason: they were cheap and widely available "analog" synths. Let's not even get into the VCO debate...

While something like a Moog Prodigy might have been running around $800 and up, 106's could commonly be found $300-350. Even an MS2000 or Nord Lead (the other synths you'd see commonly crop up at shows every now and then) couldn't be had at anywhere near that price, and that didn't have the pleasure of being vintage. My point: no one I knew who owned one did so because it sounded great, they owned one because they could afford it.

Now that said, at $40 (for what to my memory sounds like an accurate emulation) you'd be crazy not to buy the TAL version.