Greetings to all you honourable Devs and Kvr folowers of this year's amazing Developer challenge and a very special regard to the man behind the stage, Ben for making it for real.
This year Synthescience enters the arena with the Poly 2106, a Vsti whose roots starts back in the flamboyant 80's synth pop luxury and ends up somewere in the mid 90's Dance burst scene, inspired by a couple of machines that helped to define the sound of those days (and which shall remain unameless..)
Our intention when designing this plug was to fill our studio and tracks with those trademark tones and since we dont actually own any of those (unnamed cool synths) the only (reasonable) thing we can do was a fair emulation of the features and tones we crave on those awesome machines for using in the studio.
In the end we didnt spend real cash on real machines (due to shortage of the vile metal..) but it turned out that we had to spend big time on searching for info, listening to stuff and testing alike until the idea begins to take shape, then refinements continued and so on..
Initially it was adressed as a possible comercial plugin but then DC12 appeared on the map and the best thing we had to throw at it was this project, totally unrestricted and full featured as it can be (and as it should be in a true Developers Challenge)
Anyway since improvement is allways possible and feedback is allways needed (and apreciated too) we opened this thread concerning any Poly 2106 issues wathever they may be, we are here to listen, to reply and to assimilate your feedback..
Till there make the tweaking happen..
The Synthescience team
Poly 2106 Suport area..
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 37 posts since 20 Aug, 2009 from Portugal
-
- KVRAF
- 2628 posts since 30 Mar, 2007 from In and Out Burger
Yes, fantastic sounding! But for some reason, causes a slight delay in the starting and stopping of FLStudio 10.
[Insert Signature Here]
-
- KVRian
- 1359 posts since 3 Dec, 2002
Really like this synth. My only suggestion/request would be more destinations for aftertouch. I like the way you have implemented the control section,these are the things for me that move things to the next level. I find a lot of synth plug-ins sound really nice but feel kind of static when you play them.
It's easy to get this to respond to your playing, not a fan of big mod matrix's.
Thanks
It's easy to get this to respond to your playing, not a fan of big mod matrix's.
Thanks
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 37 posts since 20 Aug, 2009 from Portugal
Well thank you folks for the interest and attention regarding the Poly 2106 synth, really appreciated.
Regarding the point stated by MRT about more destinations for aftertouch we could only see another place to route it which could be the PWM of the square wave and it is easy to implement it without changing a single pixel of the original layout, its something that could be addressed in a future version of the Poly 2106, we've registered the remark in the "Good Idea" section.
One thing we would like to know about from the user side is how about CPU waste? we'd really like to know more about it in order to see if the approach we made about it was worthwhile cause behind the panel things are quite dense and the "MultiSaw" thing takes a big slice of the CPU pie, but that one is really heavy s**t don't you agree? Oh MRT we also dislike big mod matrixes too, that entire knob thing is way better and fun.
Thanks again for dropping your comments.
The Synthescience Team
Regarding the point stated by MRT about more destinations for aftertouch we could only see another place to route it which could be the PWM of the square wave and it is easy to implement it without changing a single pixel of the original layout, its something that could be addressed in a future version of the Poly 2106, we've registered the remark in the "Good Idea" section.
One thing we would like to know about from the user side is how about CPU waste? we'd really like to know more about it in order to see if the approach we made about it was worthwhile cause behind the panel things are quite dense and the "MultiSaw" thing takes a big slice of the CPU pie, but that one is really heavy s**t don't you agree? Oh MRT we also dislike big mod matrixes too, that entire knob thing is way better and fun.
Thanks again for dropping your comments.
The Synthescience Team
-
- KVRist
- 100 posts since 6 Jan, 2003
Yes, CPU is a bit high, but I don't mind, I have a Core i7 CPU.
And it is great sounding!
But I think the GUI needs improvement!:
- the sliders are barely visible (a white dash on a white dashed background)
- also there is mostly low contrast e.g. black on grey and grey on red even on brightest monitor settings
- labels and fake LCD display fonts are way too small, a problem this plugin shares with some synthedit creations
- BPM values are very hard to set accurately using the slider.
- Arpegiator: division, octave and ARP-mode use sliders as a selector control. The mouse movement adjustment is not right. For example when moving the octave slider from 1 upwards to 2. The slider jumps to 2 when the mouse pointe is already at 3
Don't take that too negatively, but for me it spoils the fun using your plugin a bit.
And it is great sounding!
But I think the GUI needs improvement!:
- the sliders are barely visible (a white dash on a white dashed background)
- also there is mostly low contrast e.g. black on grey and grey on red even on brightest monitor settings
- labels and fake LCD display fonts are way too small, a problem this plugin shares with some synthedit creations
- BPM values are very hard to set accurately using the slider.
- Arpegiator: division, octave and ARP-mode use sliders as a selector control. The mouse movement adjustment is not right. For example when moving the octave slider from 1 upwards to 2. The slider jumps to 2 when the mouse pointe is already at 3
Don't take that too negatively, but for me it spoils the fun using your plugin a bit.
-
- KVRian
- 500 posts since 29 Jul, 2002 from Chicago
I really like this synth. Makes me want to do an EP just full of m7(9) chords with the pads.
It's a little awkward having typical modwheel assignments on the pitch bend, and I have a regular mono aftertouch (channel pressure) control that that doesn't seem to register.
It IS a cpu monster, but it's worth the sacrifice. Also, I'm still on an old dual-core Pentium (860 I think)
I think really, other than the cpu use, which I wouldn't want changed if it's going to sacrifice the sound) is the MW/PB/AT assignments, seems a little confusing and limited, but I might need to wrap my head around how it works more. Maybe I'm overcomplicating it or having a brainfart with something about it. This is really great, though! Thanks!
It's a little awkward having typical modwheel assignments on the pitch bend, and I have a regular mono aftertouch (channel pressure) control that that doesn't seem to register.
It IS a cpu monster, but it's worth the sacrifice. Also, I'm still on an old dual-core Pentium (860 I think)
I think really, other than the cpu use, which I wouldn't want changed if it's going to sacrifice the sound) is the MW/PB/AT assignments, seems a little confusing and limited, but I might need to wrap my head around how it works more. Maybe I'm overcomplicating it or having a brainfart with something about it. This is really great, though! Thanks!
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 37 posts since 20 Aug, 2009 from Portugal
Greetings RL,
The points you've stated about the GUI:
"the sliders are barely visible (a white dash on a white dashed background)
- also there is mostly low contrast e.g. black on grey and grey on red even on brightest monitor settings"
Gave us a good hint for a layout revamp that would be implemented in the next version of the Poly 2106, the background can be bleached a bit towards a clearer grey tone (like in the J**o 106 pannel colour for example)without compromising the "vintage look" but we will assign this task to after the DC is over. Its recorded in the "Good idea section"
"labels and fake LCD display fonts are way too small, a problem this plugin shares with some synthedit creations"
This one is quite difficult to turn around since the fake LCD fonts you've stated are in fact custom made pixel by pixel (like one image for each number depicted)to avoid aliasing. Each number excluding nº 1 are 6x5 pixels sized, on another display for example "factor" the numbers and letters depicter are sized aound 6x3 px. Indeed they are small but the Poly 2106 layout is generously crowded with knobs and sliders and everithing was designet to fit a 910x396 pixels room. We cannot see another way of turning this around other than enlarging the total synth area, resize knobs and sliders and we dont want to mess around that(at least for now..)
"- BPM values are very hard to set accurately using the slider."
Admittedly yes, the wider the numeric range, the difficult is to set it acurately as you stated, but see it from a different light, for example as an analog knob or slider from an older (analog) synth, analog behaviour is not allways precise, to turn around this carachteristic unprecision we have included a "SYNC" switch to bypass the slider(s)or knob(s) in question and provide a variable range of division or multiplication factors to choose from based in the set host tempo, we point it in the user manual.
"Arpegiator: division, octave and ARP-mode use sliders as a selector control. The mouse movement adjustment is not right. For example when moving the octave slider from 1 upwards to 2. The slider jumps to 2 when the mouse pointe is already at 3"
Those 3 sliders are each one made from a single image to each value presented, the octave slider for example is made of 4 images and moving it with the mouse ponter is as you mentioned a bit jumpy, however if you have the chance of using a midi controller and assign it (by means of midi learn feature) to the slider in question you should feel it responding more naturally.
We've apreciated your observations and dont take it negatively, you have given us a feedback from a users point of view and thats something we give credit.
The Synthescience Team.
The points you've stated about the GUI:
"the sliders are barely visible (a white dash on a white dashed background)
- also there is mostly low contrast e.g. black on grey and grey on red even on brightest monitor settings"
Gave us a good hint for a layout revamp that would be implemented in the next version of the Poly 2106, the background can be bleached a bit towards a clearer grey tone (like in the J**o 106 pannel colour for example)without compromising the "vintage look" but we will assign this task to after the DC is over. Its recorded in the "Good idea section"
"labels and fake LCD display fonts are way too small, a problem this plugin shares with some synthedit creations"
This one is quite difficult to turn around since the fake LCD fonts you've stated are in fact custom made pixel by pixel (like one image for each number depicted)to avoid aliasing. Each number excluding nº 1 are 6x5 pixels sized, on another display for example "factor" the numbers and letters depicter are sized aound 6x3 px. Indeed they are small but the Poly 2106 layout is generously crowded with knobs and sliders and everithing was designet to fit a 910x396 pixels room. We cannot see another way of turning this around other than enlarging the total synth area, resize knobs and sliders and we dont want to mess around that(at least for now..)
"- BPM values are very hard to set accurately using the slider."
Admittedly yes, the wider the numeric range, the difficult is to set it acurately as you stated, but see it from a different light, for example as an analog knob or slider from an older (analog) synth, analog behaviour is not allways precise, to turn around this carachteristic unprecision we have included a "SYNC" switch to bypass the slider(s)or knob(s) in question and provide a variable range of division or multiplication factors to choose from based in the set host tempo, we point it in the user manual.
"Arpegiator: division, octave and ARP-mode use sliders as a selector control. The mouse movement adjustment is not right. For example when moving the octave slider from 1 upwards to 2. The slider jumps to 2 when the mouse pointe is already at 3"
Those 3 sliders are each one made from a single image to each value presented, the octave slider for example is made of 4 images and moving it with the mouse ponter is as you mentioned a bit jumpy, however if you have the chance of using a midi controller and assign it (by means of midi learn feature) to the slider in question you should feel it responding more naturally.
We've apreciated your observations and dont take it negatively, you have given us a feedback from a users point of view and thats something we give credit.
The Synthescience Team.
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 37 posts since 20 Aug, 2009 from Portugal
mooter wrote:I really like this synth. Makes me want to do an EP just full of m7(9) chords with the pads.
It's a little awkward having typical modwheel assignments on the pitch bend, and I have a regular mono aftertouch (channel pressure) control that that doesn't seem to register.
It IS a cpu monster, but it's worth the sacrifice. Also, I'm still on an old dual-core Pentium (860 I think)
I think really, other than the cpu use, which I wouldn't want changed if it's going to sacrifice the sound) is the MW/PB/AT assignments, seems a little confusing and limited, but I might need to wrap my head around how it works more. Maybe I'm overcomplicating it or having a brainfart with something about it. This is really great, though! Thanks!
Welcome mooter,
m7(9) chords really goes fine on Poly 2106 pads, its a chord shape we really like to chop around so we understand your words fully.
The older the cpu, the heavier Poly 2106 behaves, we have an even older one, a P4 3.2Ghz - 1Gb Ram and is sort of manageable but not at all the best horse for Poly 2106 to ride. We have taken on the feedback from users and for example RL (cheers) states:
"Yes, CPU is a bit high, but I don't mind, I have a Core i7 CPU.
And it is great sounding!"
So the better the machine, the better the ride thats a fact.
One (undesired) possible way of sparing cpu cicles would be by means of "Lobotomizing" the Poly 2106 features especially two of the most cpu demanding of them all:
"Osc Warp" function out (oh not at all)
"Multi Saw" out and leave the rest, (and it doesnt deserved the Poly 2106 badge anymore..) no for shure.
These two are as stated, cpu heavy features but in our opinion also as users, and taking on your words - whort the sacrifice - agreed.
About the MW/PB/AT assignments we think that after one is used to it, it ceases to be complicated, try to spend a little more time around and you may (eventually) gave it a second thought,
Apreciated your coments,
The Synthescience Team
