Thoughts On SuperWave Tarkus [Korg MS2000 Clone] and Sirius?

[ENV1]

I don't think it is irrelevant.

But it is.

Obviously it is also about the quality of the algorithms etc. that the programmer writes.

Its ONLY about the code, not also. And thats exactly why it is completely irrelevant if a plugin was made with SE because it is the code that generates the sound. Not the host.

(Like i said, a plugin doesnt sound different only because you run it on MacOS rather than Windows either. Because it couldnt. Its simply impossible because if all that an application would do is calculate 1+1 the result would always be 2 regardless of what is executing the code that does the calculation.)

[fluffy_little_something]

I don't think it is irrelevant.

But it is.

Obviously it is also about the quality of the algorithms etc. that the programmer writes.

Its ONLY about the code, not also. And thats exactly why it is completely irrelevant if a plugin was made with SE because it is the code that generates the sound. Not the host.

(Like i said, a plugin doesnt sound different only because you run it on MacOS rather than Windows either. Because it couldnt. Its simply impossible because if all that an application would do is calculate 1+1 the result would always be 2 regardless of what is executing the code that does the calculation.)

I am not speaking of SE's potential, but the status quo. Yes, it may well be possible to program a professional $xxx synth in SE, but nobody does. Because if someone has great programming skills, they will avoid SE (not least because of its reputation, a vicious circle) and program the whole thing themselves.

[fluffy_little_something]

Someone said the 64-bit version works via JBridge. Makes me wonder if Superwave pays a fee because JBridge is not freeware.

[wagtunes]

I don't think it is irrelevant.

But it is.

Obviously it is also about the quality of the algorithms etc. that the programmer writes.

Its ONLY about the code, not also. And thats exactly why it is completely irrelevant if a plugin was made with SE because it is the code that generates the sound. Not the host.

(Like i said, a plugin doesnt sound different only because you run it on MacOS rather than Windows either. Because it couldnt. Its simply impossible because if all that an application would do is calculate 1+1 the result would always be 2 regardless of what is executing the code that does the calculation.)

You are fighting a losing battle with this guy ENV1. I've learned that the hard way. When he digs his heels in on something, forget it. And if somebody DID come out with an SE plugin that really sounded great, his response would be "Yeah, but it's only one guy." And if a second person did, his response would be "Yeah, but it's only two guys."

I have never in my life met anybody as pig headed as this guy. If you're not an analog subtractive synth, you're worthless to him. Nothing else exists in HIS world other than the things that HE'S interested in.

So do yourself a favor. Cut your losses now and RUN as fast and as far away from this guy as you can.

I will NEVER. Repeat, NEVER get into another conversation with him as long as I live.

And I'm sure he couldn't be happier.

RUN...FAST!!!!!!!!!

[ENV1]

I am not speaking of SE's potential, but the status quo. Yes, it may well be possible to program a professional $xxx synth in SE, but nobody does. Because if someone has great programming skills, they will avoid SE (not least because of its reputation, a vicious circle) and program the whole thing themselves.

Well i had the impression that you thought that other plugins sound better because they were not made in SE. If i got that wrong then never mind, but you know how it is with SE. That 'reputation' youve just mentioned is mainly due to severe misconceptions about it and IMO it deserves a lot better than that because there really isnt anything wrong with it.

[ENV1]

RUN...FAST!!!!!!!!!

I know the lil fluffster can be a bit 'stubborn' at times but i think hes alright.

At least he can engage in a conversation without getting rude, thats one thing that cant be said about everybody around here.

(Not a dig at you, i think youre alright too.)

[Distorted Horizon]

I have never in my life met anybody as pig headed as this guy.

I don't know what you're talking about.. He's so fluffy

[egbert101]

<delete>

[XeonKnight]

Tarkus sounds really good to my ears! That U2 demo was great.

[yul]

Very nice yes but the rez does not behave like MS2K afaik.. not big deal but would have like to get a similar sound.

[egbert101]

<delete>

[yul]

Probably because the sound generation techniques used by these manufacturers are not conventional and not so easy to recreate as such.

I know JP uses some odd algorithms possibly MS as well and covered in great lenghts in the forum..

[Ingonator]

So looks like Ultimate and Equinox are both based off a Roland JP-8080 [See image below]. But no idea how close it is to the original (probably not). Which begs the question, why has no one else created an accurate JP-8080 emulation and not just the supersaw?



http://www.vintagesynth.com/roland/jp8080.php

AFAIK U-He Diva is the only plugin that contains all the waveshapes, cross modulation, Sync and ringmod like in a real JP-8000/8080 (in the "Digital" osc module of Diva). On the other hand the anlog filter models in Diva seem to sound and behave really different to the digital multimode filter in the JP-8000/8080. Due to that it is difficult to get a filtered sound that is similar to the real thing. The overall sound you get from Diva seems to be much darker and also the resonance behavior seems to be different. Adding an EQ might help to get a brighter sound with Diva.
Diva has similar waveshapes in both Oscs while in the real thing the second osc only seems to include "standard" waveforms.

With the JP6K plugin the raw Supersaw sound (which is the only waveshape there) seems to nail the real thing nicely and same is true about the "tone control" (= simple EQ) but the filter seems to behave really different to the real thing.

[Distorted Horizon]

So looks like Ultimate and Equinox are both based off a Roland JP-8080. But no idea how close it is to the original (probably not).

Sadowick tested
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6Fr2a0DLGk

Which begs the question, why has no one else created an accurate JP-8080 emulation and not just the supersaw?

JP6k is quite close.. Not fully accurate emulation but that supersaw part

[SciFiArtMan]

I must say I'm impressed with the Equinoxe synth! Listening to the audio demos of reproduced JM Jarre songs, I feel like this synth hits the mark 95% of the time. And opening the deceptively simple interface reveals some impressive tools within - 16 part oscillators with many parameters to adjust including individual mod settings, x4 32 step sequencers, etc..

Sure, the scope may be limited, but for creating JM Jarre sounds (from the first 5 or so iconic albums) it's quite a find, IMO!

The GUI is small, but not as bad as the Korg Legacy Collection. And on my laptop, it couldn't be much larger and still fit (my rez reduced for failing eyes). There's also an HD version, that claims it needs a 1080 size screen, but this may be due only to the fact that all screen/tabs in Equinoxe are on one screen, i.e., the size of the individual panels may be the same as standard synth - haven't checked to see.

This has been created with SynthEdit, which doesn't fill me with great excitement! But fairly accurate reproductions of JM Jarre iconic sounds and an impressive array of control parameters (and low price) makes this an interesting synth to explore, if the artist and music in focus appeal to you - I say give a chance!

SynthEdit really puts me off! But HG did well, and I like Vera Kinter's Art Pyrite too, so maybe there IS a place for a SE creation or two, for some of us. At worst, Equinoxe is a very good bang for your buck!