New DIVA components

[Urs]

Regarding the volume relation between square wave and others in the Dual VCO, I'll be happy to check with the OB-X and even the Pro One. Maybe we can add switches with different relations, but I'm quite certain we won't have knobs or faders (overkill, doesn't fit Diva's concept).

[EvilDragon]

Regarding envelope shapes I'll happily check out our SH-101 - maybe it's "true exponential" without an added bias below zero. I'm also open to something like a 5x faster switch like the MS-20 has.

There could be some trimpots on Trimmer page for A and D/R slopes for each env (so, 4 trimpots total)?

[Urs]

Regarding envelope shapes I'll happily check out our SH-101 - maybe it's "true exponential" without an added bias below zero. I'm also open to something like a 5x faster switch like the MS-20 has.

There could be some trimpots on Trimmer page for A and D/R slopes for each env (so, 4 trimpots total)?

Hmmm, one can't really control the slopes in the analogue model. One can adjust the reference level, but this not only changes the slope, it also changes the times and the scaling of the knobs. There's no independent parameter that could be added.

However, knob scales and ranges can be changed and maybe a new model could be added. With a hell of a lot of work, an existing model based on a different reference level could be tweaked to same times and scales, with just different slopes. We would require to have an analogue prototype though, but maybe the SH-101, and Obie or an SCI will do.

[EvilDragon]

Oh right, because the curvature of a slope is determined by overshooting the capacitor discharge then stopping it at a certain voltage (which in effect would be the highest point of the envelope), correct?

http://www.earlevel.com/main/2013/06/22 ... dsr-video/

This here.

[david.beholder]

Regarding the CS-80, first of all it doesn't fit in Diva's voice structure. Like the 800dv it's a layout with two parallel VCO-VCF-VCA stages. We could at most do just one lane in Diva, and that would suck.

Secondly I'm convinced that the CS-80's appeal stems from the hardware (poly-at keyboard, ribbon controller) and from the people who mastered it. If it was for the sound and features of the synthesis engine, we should be having a galore of requests for a CS-30 implementation rather than a CS-80. But I suspect that even if we did a polyphonic CS-30, it would be sniffed at, regardless if it sounds exactly like a CS-80 with a better feature set. I believe that the hype for a CS-80 emulation has more to do with psychology than with the technology itself. I'm sure it'll always disappoint (even if a CS-30 clone would be something worth wile IMHO)

That said, I sincerely hope that some other company comes up with a CS-80 emulation on Diva's level. A companion product to Diva with a dual structure isn't necessarily what I'm into.

Well, 2 stages could be emulated with two Divas in parallel afaik, but what about single stage or CS-80 has become complete no-no for U-he?
Also how different cs-30 from cs-80 if we're talking about one stage.

[Stollmeister]

Someone please remind me what the Prophet V2 brings new to the table, considering what's already there.

The sound of the filter is remarkable (judging from the analogue replica in our Eurorack modular)

- Urs

Now I'm curious. Is it the E440 filter? Or is it the one from Tiptop? Doepfer?

[Urs]

Well, 2 stages could be emulated with two Divas in parallel afaik, but what about single stage or CS-80 has become complete no-no for U-he?
Also how different cs-30 from cs-80 if we're talking about one stage.

No, the two stages can interact via the ring modulator afaik.

The CS-80 hasn't become a complete no-no per se. I just don't think that it makes sense for us to do an emulation of it within Diva. The best chance to get it emulated from us would be a template within Zebra3, provided that its toolbox can be adapted to the sonic properties of the original.

The CS-30 offers one lane of the CS-80 in a monophonic synth, with a lot of extra configuration options. It can essentially be used as a two-lane synth. A dual or multi-layered CS-30 would be the ultimate emulation for that kind of specimen.

[Urs]

Now I'm curious. Is it the E440 filter? Or is it the one from Tiptop? Doepfer?

We got the Tiptop.

[Urs]

Oh right, because the curvature of a slope is determined by overshooting the capacitor discharge then stopping it at a certain voltage (which in effect would be the highest point of the envelope), correct?

http://www.earlevel.com/main/2013/06/22 ... dsr-video/

This here.

Can't watch vid atm, but yes, that sounds about right. One has to charge the capacitor with a voltage higher than Attack level because otherwise it'd never reach decay stage. Likewise, the Sustain can be below zero as can be the discharge on release. I suspect this is done to avoid audio bleed through on VCA circuitry (and on poly synths maybe to determine the state of a voice).

[Breeze]

Regarding the volume relation between square wave and others in the Dual VCO, I'll be happy to check with the OB-X and even the Pro One. Maybe we can add switches with different relations, but I'm quite certain we won't have knobs or faders (overkill, doesn't fit Diva's concept).

I concur that volume balancing would help considerably, though there are conceptual differences like a separate noise source and separate volumes for all three sources (I did try to use "Noise & Dual VCO Mix" as a workaround but it doesn't seem to be doing what it's supposed to.) Anyway thanks for considering this as well as the "flex-envelope" possibilities. It's very appreciated.

[Howard]

Well, 2 stages could be emulated with two Divas in parallel afaik...

No, the two stages can interact via the ring modulator afaik.

There's no interaction, the CS80 "ring modulator" doesn't RM between the two synths but modulates both with an LFO.

[pdxindy]

Regarding the volume relation between square wave and others in the Dual VCO, I'll be happy to check with the OB-X and even the Pro One. Maybe we can add switches with different relations, but I'm quite certain we won't have knobs or faders (overkill, doesn't fit Diva's concept).

I concur that volume balancing would help considerably, though there are conceptual differences like a separate noise source and separate volumes for all three sources (I did try to use "Noise & Dual VCO Mix" as a workaround but it doesn't seem to be doing what it's supposed to.) Anyway thanks for considering this as well as the "flex-envelope" possibilities. It's very appreciated.

Help considerably?

Sorry, but Diva does not need considerable help. In fact, there is already enormous versatility with 5 different Osc models and 5 different filter models.

Btw, and Noise and Dual VCO Mix mixes Osc1 and Osc2 on the Dual VCO... not noise... it controls noise on the Triple VCO and DCO.

[EvilDragon]

Btw, and Noise and Dual VCO Mix mixes Osc1 and Osc2 on the Dual VCO... not noise... it controls noise on the Triple VCO and DCO.

Perhaps it would make a bit more sense (it would be clearer to the end user), if this text label renamed itself when Dual VCO is selected (saying Osc 1/2 Mix), and when Triple VCO and DCO are selected it would say Noise Mix... Ditto for FM & Cross Mod Depth label.

Is this even possible, Urs?

[pdxindy]

Btw, and Noise and Dual VCO Mix mixes Osc1 and Osc2 on the Dual VCO... not noise... it controls noise on the Triple VCO and DCO.

Perhaps it would make a bit more sense (it would be clearer to the end user), if this text label renamed itself when Dual VCO is selected (saying Osc 1/2 Mix), and when Triple VCO and DCO are selected it would say Noise Mix... Ditto for FM & Cross Mod Depth label.

it is in the manual and the parameter it modulates in each case gets the red 'm' symbol next to it... Seems fairly clear

[nBeat]

I wouldn't mind a resonator like the classic one on the PolyMoog.

I admit I wouldn't say no to a resonator either. But as this would introduce three more filter feedback calculation cycles, it could be also a bit 'expensive' for the CPU.

Maybe a fixed filter design (like the originals, without modulation) won't be too heavy, and also only one unit per Diva instance (not for each voice) after the 'voice card' sum.

Maybe put the resonator in the effect slot?

Yeah I think that would be nice. Although there are already resonator plugins, I just thought that u-he's would sound better. Or a separate u-he resonator plugin?

Only thinking about it. Diva is great as it (she) is, and we had major additions last year. Not demanding anything from u-he, they did their duty and more. It is just that a resonator would make sense in my opinion.

I figured it could be placed after the voice summing before the effects,
or as an effect. I'd prefer in between (tab option?).