Psychoacoustic Virtual Synths?

[ghettosynth]

The Omni blurb seems to be trying to take credit as the first for things they took from others that really were before them.
That harmonic morphing claim seems more like a re-wording to get around Tone2's patent?

Did I miss something? Do you have a link for this patent?

[BBFG#]

The Omni blurb seems to be trying to take credit as the first for things they took from others that really were before them.
That harmonic morphing claim seems more like a re-wording to get around Tone2's patent?

Did I miss something? Do you have a link for this patent?

No, only the claim Tone2 makes on their site.

And they could all be talking shite around us anyway.
(Which seems to be where much of this thread has sprawled to).

[Ingonator]

The Omni blurb seems to be trying to take credit as the first for things they took from others that really were before them.
That harmonic morphing claim seems more like a re-wording to get around Tone2's patent?

Did I miss something? Do you have a link for this patent?

No, only the claim Tone2 makes on their site.

And they could all be talking shite around us anyway.
(Which seems to be where much of this thread has sprawled to).

For the records i did not mention any relations of Omnsiphere and Tone2 patents...

In my post i only mentioned that based on the description at the omnisphere website a psychoacoustic approach only seemed to be used while creating some of the sample content but not as part of the Omni syntheis engine or the FX section.

Where is that claim at the Tone2 website you talk about (that one related to Omnisphere...)?


Ingo

[Ingonator]

Speaking about Omnisphere i just found this video about "Psychoacoustic sampling", explained by eric Persing himself:

http://vimeo.com/5748896

Not sure if i really get it but it looks like a combination of "usual" sampling with psychoacosutic processing (not sure how far also "non psycoacoustic" processing is involved...).

[BBFG#]

Perhaps its not a patented idea of theirs. I seem to remember reading there it was, but now see it as their 'unique' method.
Listed in their specs as:

*Tone2's award winning Harmonic Content Morphing Synthesis ™

And no, no one said you mentioned it. Only that it is mentioned on their site and implied as such. Much seems to be stated in implications from both companies utilizing these terms though.

And Eric seems to talk around it more than explain it.

[V0RT3X]

I find Tone2's aggressive marketing comes across like that of a used car sales person. Sure they might have useable products but all this patented stuff that makes them appear to be selling ground breaking stuff inside minimalistic products just comes across as hoky.

I understand that trying to market software instruments inside a saturated market is probably fairly difficult but.. still.

Anyhow I probably will buy Tone2 again in the future because they are good products, but I'm not really sure if any of their stuff is exactly ground-breaking sonically. Then again maybe I just have not tested the other stuff long enough.

[BBFG#]

I find Tone2's aggressive marketing comes across like that of a used car sales person. Sure they might have useable products but all this patented stuff that makes them appear to be selling ground breaking stuff inside minimalistic products just comes across as hoky.

I understand that trying to market software instruments inside a saturated market is probably fairly difficult but.. still.

Anyhow I probably will buy Tone2 again in the future because they are good products, but I'm not really sure if any of their stuff is exactly ground-breaking sonically. Then again maybe I just have not tested the other stuff long enough.

Spectra has that same feel, car sales.
I downloaded the Tone 2 demos along with a host of others when I decided to give ITB synths another go after them failing me so often. Thing is, I could never justify the Tone 2 price either, but unlike other demos, could not simply dismiss them and remove from my system. They're just fun to play, even if only the demos that I wouldn't use for sequencing - since they were demos.
Then that BOGO deal came and I picked up three of them along with a sample set I wanted for a while too. A couple of months later, they had a half off sale, so I picked up Nemesis too.
I really like their synths a lot. And between the two companies we're talking about here, feel that Tone2 has a lot more 'oomph' and presence in their sound than Spectra does.

Nemesis often sounds too close to RayBlaster (or is it the other way around?) But they both have a unique quality to them that is their own and once I found the FM type sounds I look for in FM of Nemesis, found it to be the one to go to for those. (Synthmaster has been reduced to only the Nori soundbanks).
Gladiator 2 is my favorite of the four though. Because it covers the D50 type sounds as well as backing up my Korg Radias. (BTW, I use Zebra more to back up my V-Synth and don't like what it has to offer in D50 emulations as much).
They are well worth the price in a sale. And I dare say so would Spectra if they gave a bundle price like NI does on Komplete or had a once a year 50% off. But at their current prices, I could only suggest them to people with a lot cash burning.

[fluffy_little_something]

To me that term implies they are using some sort of tricks to make me think it sounds better than it actually does
Like stewardesses deliberately "spilling" coffee powder in order to make people think the air does not stink

[BBFG#]

To me that term implies they are using some sort of tricks to make me think it sounds better than it actually does
Like stewardesses deliberately "spilling" coffee powder in order to make people think the air does not stink

Cool. After reading so many descriptions of what it is and how it's implemented in different ways, it seems to me you're pretty close to accurate there.

[Ingonator]

To me that term implies they are using some sort of tricks to make me think it sounds better than it actually does

If with those "tricks" (how you call it) it sounds better there is nothing bad about that. it's no "cheating".

One problem i see with the psychoacoustic processing in the Tone2 synths is that you do not really have full control over the parameters and it's mostly done automatically, opposing to the AkustiX Multi FX plugin where you got some more controls. Opposing to the Warmverb Multi FX (which got a bunch of different FXs) AkustiX seems to be more focused on psychoacoustic processing (e.g. the "Psycho EQ"). There is an interesting feature called multiband stereo widener that works like a 3 band EQ where you could set the stereo width differently for the different bands.

For example in Saurus the psychoacoustic processing is activated or switched off with the "Boost" button. In several cases the sound is indeed improved while in other cases it seems to get worse. Anyway nobody forces you to use this feature. Some patches sound very nice without that feature and in other cases i prefer using an "usual" EQ plugin wher at the moment i prefer either PSP NobelQ or Stillwell Audio VibeEQ (both have their own character so they are not really "neutral" EQs).

In other Tone2 synths like Nemesis you at least got different modes like e.g. "Bass Boost" but could be also switched off.

Here is a description of some Boost modes from the manual (this is selected in the Config menu, not the FXs menu):

No Boost: no boost or enhancement.

Psychoacoustic: Equalizes non-linearities of the human ear, making the patch sound thicker and louder, without raising the overall volume.

Bass Boost: Equalizes non-linearities of the human ear. Suitable for most bass sounds to add additional low end.

Depending on the patch/sound you could either hear no difference, a small one or even a bigger difference. This simply does not work like e.g. a "usual" EQ wher you should be able to get a change of the sound more easy by bossting certain frequencies. Wirh such EQ usually also the overall volume is increased while with psychoacoustic boosting like implemented in Nemesis this usually is not the case.

If you got the Nemesis demo you could check e.g. a patch called "2 Fat Uncle MF" in the "Bass" folder of the factory sounds. In the CFG (config) menu you could switch "Bass Boost" to "No Boost" and you should be able to hear a difference.

Nemesis (and other Tone2 synths) als got several "usual" FXs to shape the sound further inckuding e.g. EQ and a Compressor FX.

With Rayblaster the psychoacoustic approach is also embedded with the synthesis engine, beyond the processing stuff so in that case it is a bit different.



Ingo

[fluffy_little_something]

That is not correct. No idea why you think that way. I do like and use effects. But I want to do so deliberately. When I apply a chorus or a reverb, I know what it is and how it works.
That is not the case with psychoacoustic tricks. The prefix psycho- alone has a negative connotation

Your quote on the non-linear human ear makes me wonder why they think their synths should do the equalizing for us. We all have eq's to make the sound so that it pleases our ears and fits into the mix. Not to mention that each ear is different. Even if everyone had the exactly the same ears, our different brains would interpret the very same signal differently.

[Ingonator]

That is not correct. No idea why you think that way. I do like and use effects. But I want to do so deliberately. When I apply a chorus or a reverb, I know what it is and how it works.
That is not the case with psychoacoustic tricks. The prefix psycho- alone has a negative connotation

Your quote on the non-linear human ear makes me wonder why they think their synths should do the equalizing for us. We all have eq's to make the sound so that it pleases our ears and fits into the mix. Not to mention that each ear is different. Even if everyone had the exactly the same ears, our different brains would interpret the very same signal differently.

Nbody forces you to use the psychoacoustic processing in e.g. Nemesis. The psychoacoustic processing is actuvated independently from the FX section.
Nemeis got a big selection of other Fxs which also includes e.g. a "usual" EQ or a Compressor besides many others where you could use two FXs at the same time.
With Saurus there is no other EQ but you could switch psychoacoustic processing off.
Anyway with several patches the automatic psychoacoustic processing included with Saurus seems to lead to good results.

It seems to be quite difficult to get exactly the same results with "manual" tweaking of an EQ and mabye another FX, especially if you want to keep the overall volume constant.
At the end both traditionl processing and psychoacoustic processing got their uses.

The processing included with the Tone2 AkustiX FX plugin also has a few additional controls compared to that included in the Tone2 synths.


Ingo

[Gamma-UT]

When I apply a chorus or a reverb, I know what it is and how it works.
That is not the case with psychoacoustic tricks. The prefix psycho- alone has a negative connotation

Chorus and reverb are indeed psychoacoustic tricks – one emulates multiple instruments from a single using aural cues that the brain interprets as coming from more than one. Reverb is a big bag of filters and delays meant to emulate a sound within a space. Most usable forms of delay are about psychoacoustics, such as the Haas effect etc.

Even EQ is to some extent psychoacoustic – you're using delay to reinforce or cancel frequencies, often munging phase around the cutoff points that will seem to tighten up a sound or make it more diffuse.

Just because you don't like the word doesn't make the techniques less useful.

[Ingonator]

Not to forget that the MP3 compression is all about psychoacoustics. It uses a trick based on the limits of human hearing to reduce the file size a lot compared to e.g. WAV files.
Of course also depending on bit rate peole with very good hearing capabilities could still notice the difference.


Ingo

[fluffy_little_something]

So? As long as I use a reverb or delay or EQ on purpose, I don't mind, obviously. Neither do I care if a synth uses psychoacoustic stuff, as long as it is clearly separate and I can turn it off.
But I do think it is a marketing term, a negative one in my view. They could have given it a more accurate, technical name...