to my knowledge no other synthesizer on earth has the same filter saturation characteristic mine has. one other synthesizer has part of it - nexus2. it doesn't have the new features i've recently implemented.

"mid-range" is an odd characterization. it's possible you're used to pre-eq'd sounds.

making a claim like you have, that a juno-60 can't produce anything bad is ridiculous at best.

can't you come up with any more direct technical attacks? that's the great stuff.

a reviewer's inability to find technical faults just points to a fault with the reviewer in my opinion.

so, bad interface. that's a fine complaint. i find it difficult at first as well but i've never really cared for interfaces so i'm open to whatever anyone wants to do. branis did the one you're looking at although i replaced the controls with my own.

well it is a thread about reviews.

edited out xhip-related: http://presetexchange.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2

when you ask what a plugin offers you, you ought to go into it instead asking if it can solve X. if X = null, you can't really even give a valid impression. although your comments are helpful even if they're not technical issues. ( http://presetexchange.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3 )

so to add to the thread i still think it's a valid point to make in a review. just say you're making a partial review in such a case. the simplification of everything can get really annoying, especially the idea that something should only be rated on a 1-10 scale.

if forum members could up-vote/down-vote reviews, a review of a review in a sense that would help a lot. it would be even better if review content were split into sections which could be voted on independently.

Perhaps, I get the sense that it would just be a popularity contest here. The review section would end up like those idiotic "what are the 10 best plugin" threads.

We are truly living in a great age for computer music. The KVR user reviews feature so many plugins that score a perfect 10 - why, it's almost impossible to buy anything that's less than revolutionary, stellar, exceptional and top-of-the-heap! Good times, for sure.

Now seriously, I get carried away by the new kid on the block as much as anyone, and can appreciate how initial thrill and awe overwhelm objectivity and cool-headed appraisal. But this kind of undifferentiated praise makes it very hard to accurately assess a plugin's worth if you're actually in the market to buy something. You could argue that the text is much more important than the rating (and I'd agree), but, more often than not, the texts are "it's a 10!" spread out over three paragraphs, without even bothering to explain how the author arrived at his conclusions.

I realize there is no way to actually change this, but maybe some folks could take a deep breath and wait at least a month after purchasing before writing a review, so it doesn't come out all gosh and wow and super, dude.

Off to write my "Iris - ten thumbs up" review now.... followed by "If Diva's a 10, do we have to mark down all other synths, or should we set it one louder... to 11?"

You know, many of those reviews might be from company representatives disguised as an ordinary user. I'm not saying they are but you should take everything you read on the Internet with a grain of salt.

not if it required effort to vote (actually reading the review) and by associating user-names and using a "karma-like" system ( http://slashdot.org/ ) it can be quite effective. it isn't invulnerable to bias but that can be a positive attribute if the views of the user base are accurately reflected.

I'm not saying they are but you should take everything you read on the Internet with a grain of salt.

You know, many of those reviews might be from company representatives disguised as an ordinary user. I'm not saying they are but you should take everything you read on the Internet with a grain of salt.