What is KVR Audio? | Submit News | Advertise | Developer Account

Options (Affects News & Product results only):

OS:
Format:
Include:
Quick Search KVR

"Quick Search" KVR Audio's Product Database, News Items, Developer Listings, Forum Topics and videos here. For advanced Product Database searching please use the full product search. For the forum you can use the phpBB forum search.

To utilize the power of Google you can use the integrated Google Site Search.

Products 0

Developers 0

News 0

Forum 0

Videos 0

Search  

Tone2 Rayblaster: OUT NOW! (demo version available)

VST, AU, etc. plug-in Virtual Instruments discussion

Moderator: Moderators (Main)

User avatar
Krakatau
KVRAF
 
4538 posts since 24 May, 2002, from Bobo-dioulasso\BF__Geneva/CH

Postby Krakatau; Tue Dec 04, 2012 5:45 am

pdxindy wrote:
FrantzM wrote:
MaxSynths wrote:CS-80 Soft Pad MxS
Based on an impulse sampled from a real CS-80.


Nice.


Agreed... Very nice sound...


Wonderful... :)
contrary
KVRian
 
1310 posts since 12 Mar, 2007

Postby contrary; Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:25 am

I'm not as interested in knowing every ryhme and reason behind how this synth does what it does ( would rather save the time and energy to direct twoards composing) BUT;

I'm a long time T2 customer and already have warmverb.....

So whats the discount then ???

I left an inquiry at their site and am waiting for a response ; doesn't it seem that they should just cover this contingency in the e-mail they sent out to existing customers ???

Just gives a potential buyer time to get distracted or lose interest. Buisness and marketing 101 boys! :x


:?

:?

:?
Financial solvency and KVR Mix as well as oil and water.
User avatar
zvenx
KVRAF
 
4155 posts since 16 Feb, 2005, from Kingston, Jamaica

Postby zvenx; Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:41 am

I am such a software slut.....
Bought it, now to find a project to use it in, to justify my purchase :-)
rsp
User avatar
Totolitoto
KVRAF
 
1620 posts since 7 Jan, 2004, from Earth

Postby Totolitoto; Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:42 am

Krakatau wrote:
pdxindy wrote:
FrantzM wrote:
MaxSynths wrote:CS-80 Soft Pad MxS
Based on an impulse sampled from a real CS-80.


Nice.


Agreed... Very nice sound...


Wonderful... :)


Ouaaahhh
User avatar
Frantz
KVRAF
 
2603 posts since 18 Jul, 2008, from New York

Postby Frantz; Tue Dec 04, 2012 10:25 am

Thanks to Ingo and MaxSynths for posting those waveforms! :tu:
Fragile Gods: SoundCloud | Facebook
User avatar
Ingonator
KVRAF
 
7867 posts since 21 Mar, 2008, from Hannover, Germany

Postby Ingonator; Tue Dec 04, 2012 10:49 am

FrantzM wrote:Thanks to Ingo and MaxSynths for posting those waveforms! :tu:

You're welcome. :)

As mentioned at the Tone2 forum i try to publish all my waveforms sooner or later, either free, as part of a soundset or as a seperate package.
Just created a bunch of new ones with Wave Designer today and will test in Rayblaster soon.

For those who "lost" the track of the links links here they are also here (or a few pages back at this thread):
http://www.tone2.org/forum/index.php?topic=1336.0

This also contains a little "tutorial" and/or hints which should be useful.


Ingo
Waldorf Beta Forum Manager
"Atmospheric Transients" for PPG Wave 3.V
"Analog vs Digital" for Blofeld
Win 7 64-bit / Live 9 / Reaper / Studio One 2.6 / Blofeld / Pulse 2 /Waldorf + Tone 2 plugins + others
highkoo
KVRAF
 
3013 posts since 25 Jun, 2004

Postby highkoo; Tue Dec 04, 2012 11:49 am

FrantzM wrote:Thanks to Ingo and MaxSynths for posting those waveforms! :tu:

+1+1+! :)

Gribs wrote:I am not planning to attempt to reverse engineer the synth
...
like me loath the idea stealing.

Where does reverse engineering and stealing come into this?
Maybe try the demo?
Am I reading your post all wrong?

I am starting to agree that Tone2 is cursed though.
On one side, people demand that the marketing hype be validated word for word, and apparently cant understand the fundamentals of either the hype, or the synth.
On the other side, a non-novice, potential customer and reverse engineer wants detailed specifications on this new type of function, and implies it will be stolen if info is not provided.
Then there is bitching about the link in the skin, which is optional, and has been done by many other devs in the past.
I mean geezuz there arent even any trojans or adware in this one guys! :hihi:
Image
Gribs
KVRist
 
451 posts since 9 Feb, 2007, from Woodbury, Minnesota

Postby Gribs; Tue Dec 04, 2012 2:18 pm

highkoo wrote:Where does reverse engineering and stealing come into this?
Maybe try the demo?
Am I reading your post all wrong?

I am starting to agree that Tone2 is cursed though.
On one side, people demand that the marketing hype be validated word for word, and apparently cant understand the fundamentals of either the hype, or the synth.


I tried at one time to ask Tone2 about the details of Gladiator when it was released (after I purchased a license) and was met with an answer that went something like "if you are interested in licensing our technology then we will tell you". I took that as an indication that they were worried about someone reverse-engineering or otherwise stealing their ideas. Meh - I just wanted to know something about what the synth was doing (I can't remember what at the time) because a significant factor in my enjoyment of making musical sounds is understanding how the sound is generated and hearing the result - basically hearing mathematics if you will. In that case it didn't take me long to figure out how Gladiator works in sufficient detail to make me happy - is is not really all that complicated. I like Gladiator enough that I payed for an upgraded license to Gladiator 2. This is not about dissing on Tone2 but rather on trying to convince the guys to be a little more open.

RayBlaster is a different beast entirely. So far the sounds presented here sound excellent to me and the basses, noises, clicks, and pops that I hear in demos are extremely good.

Your response suggests that you know how the "filter" response is generated by RayBlaster. Would you care to elaborate? The best suggestion I heard is that a wavelet transform is used and not some sort of deconvolution. As you must be aware, the wavelet bases are over-complete bases for e.g. Hilbert spaces of square integrable functions localized in time and frequency. The central position of the "formant" would represent using all the coefficients in the wavelet transform, decreasing the formant would cut off coefficients of the wavelets associated with higher frequency content and increasing the formant would cut off coefficients of the wavelets associated with lower frequency components and the "damping" parameter would control the slope of whatever filter function is applied to cut off the coefficients. The shape of the function that cuts off the wavelet coefficients would have to be some sort of parametric function. So the "filter" is based in part upon the frequency content of the input signal and some internal parametric function. If this method is used, the "filter" is not generated entirely by the input signal; the input signal is massaged by an internal parametric function. In my opinion this is perfectly fine. I use convenient parametric functions in my own algorithms all the time. I just don't understand why this sort of explanation is not available (if it is even close to the way the synth works).

The point of all this is that all of this is nothing but conjecture. We don't know for sure what the synth is doing. I don't really care about validating the marketing hype even though it is in my opinion more than silly. All I want to know is sufficient information to help me feel good about how the synth functions.
------------------------------------------
Gribs
sonicpowa
KVRian
 
977 posts since 3 Jul, 2009

Postby sonicpowa; Tue Dec 04, 2012 2:36 pm

Gribs wrote:Your response suggests that you know how the "filter" response is generated by RayBlaster. Would you care to elaborate? The best suggestion I heard is that a wavelet transform is used and not some sort of deconvolution. As you must be aware, the wavelet bases are over-complete bases for e.g. Hilbert spaces of square integrable functions localized in time and frequency. The central position of the "formant" would represent using all the coefficients in the wavelet transform, decreasing the formant would cut off coefficients of the wavelets associated with higher frequency content and increasing the formant would cut off coefficients of the wavelets associated with lower frequency components and the "damping" parameter would control the slope of whatever filter function is applied to cut off the coefficients. The shape of the function that cuts off the wavelet coefficients would have to be some sort of parametric function. So the "filter" is based in part upon the frequency content of the input signal and some internal parametric function. If this method is used, the "filter" is not generated entirely by the input signal; the input signal is massaged by an internal parametric function. In my opinion this is perfectly fine. I use convenient parametric functions in my own algorithms all the time. I just don't understand why this sort of explanation is not available (if it is even close to the way the synth works).
Forget about it. No need to reinvent the wheel, buy Cytomic The Drop instead.
contrary
KVRian
 
1310 posts since 12 Mar, 2007

Postby contrary; Tue Dec 04, 2012 2:46 pm

T2 has always been worried sick about piracy , and I can't blame them !!!!

The present lack of respect and/or out and out ignorance about the system of intellectual property and how and why it was adopted should give any innovator pause. Some think that developers have gone of the deep end when they try anything to protect their work. I've yet to experience any issues with T2 products in the CP realm ; The stuff I have from them works really well and is top notch .



P.s.

Baastian contacted me and offered me a nice alternative incentive during the RayBlaster introduction (..... since I already have Warmverb.)

Off to send some of my hard earned cabbage to the boys of T2 .....


8)
Financial solvency and KVR Mix as well as oil and water.
highkoo
KVRAF
 
3013 posts since 25 Jun, 2004

Postby highkoo; Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:25 pm

Gribs wrote:a significant factor in my enjoyment of making musical sounds is understanding how the sound is generated and hearing the result - basically hearing mathematics if you will.

I see. I was just misreading you.
Usually for me it is enough to just know the basics, and then have a play around.
I can understand you want to actually know 'the math', especially for something 'new'.

Gribs wrote:Your response suggests that you know how the "filter" response is generated by RayBlaster.

Not at all! :lol:
Ive definitely been interested, and following along.
For me, a general understanding is enough, as long as I get to hear it.
Then maybe if it is something new and special I will want to dig deeper.
Image
Gribs
KVRist
 
451 posts since 9 Feb, 2007, from Woodbury, Minnesota

Postby Gribs; Tue Dec 04, 2012 4:26 pm

contrary wrote:T2 has always been worried sick about piracy , and I can't blame them !!!!

The present lack of respect and/or out and out ignorance about the system of intellectual property and how and why it was adopted should give any innovator pause.


Agreed. Tone2 seems to be more worried than others, but I have had no issue with Gladiator or Gladiator 2, and Bastian sent me some extra presents when I bought Gladiator 2 which was a very nice gesture. I also received a copy of BiFilter in a CM magazine and think that is a really fun plugin. I would like to support these guys; I think they do good work.

I am fully aware of issues regarding copyright and patents for software, algorithms, methods, articles, etc. I have over ten patents myself and work with many people whose patents number in the 30 to over 100 range. My dad, who is retired from a different company, has 48 patents. Many of mine to date were purchased from my company by another, so IP I have made is owned by more than one company now.

I am pretty sure that giving us a cursory overview of the Structure of RayBlaster will not give sufficient information to reverse engineer the software. Presenting a block diagram of a subtractive synthesizer or explaining how wave table sequencing works does not give sufficient information to reverse engineer the specific algorithms inside. Another example would be that we know Diva an Cypher are subtractive synthesizers that use analog modeling, and that is enough to tell us how the synths works at a high level but tells us nothing about how the analog modeling is implemented in each case.
------------------------------------------
Gribs
User avatar
SODDI
KVRAF
 
2545 posts since 2 Jul, 2007, from Oxycontin Acres, Georgia, USA

Postby SODDI; Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:41 pm

Gribs wrote: Agreed. Tone2 seems to be more worried than others, but I have had no issue with Gladiator or Gladiator 2, and Bastian sent me some extra presents when I bought Gladiator 2 which was a very nice gesture. I also received a copy of BiFilter in a CM magazine and think that is a really fun plugin. I would like to support these guys; I think they do good work.

I am fully aware of issues regarding copyright and patents for software, algorithms, methods, articles, etc. I have over ten patents myself and work with many people whose patents number in the 30 to over 100 range. My dad, who is retired from a different company, has 48 patents. Many of mine to date were purchased from my company by another, so IP I have made is owned by more than one company now.

I am pretty sure that giving us a cursory overview of the Structure of RayBlaster will not give sufficient information to reverse engineer the software. Presenting a block diagram of a subtractive synthesizer or explaining how wave table sequencing works does not give sufficient information to reverse engineer the specific algorithms inside. Another example would be that we know Diva an Cypher are subtractive synthesizers that use analog modeling, and that is enough to tell us how the synths works at a high level but tells us nothing about how the analog modeling is implemented in each case.


Actually, I think your intellectual curiousity is admirable; and in a lot of ways similiar to my own. I just don't know as much about computer-based synthesis as you.

Furthermore, a company that would get tetchy about an honest enthusiastic intellectual question like that from a customer who has purchased software from them previously is a company that I do not think I would like to do business with. Caution is one thing; paranoia is another.

Bye bye Tone 2.
User avatar
Ingonator
KVRAF
 
7867 posts since 21 Mar, 2008, from Hannover, Germany

Postby Ingonator; Tue Dec 04, 2012 11:52 pm

Gribs wrote:
Your response suggests that you know how the "filter" response is generated by RayBlaster. Would you care to elaborate? The best suggestion I heard is that a wavelet transform is used and not some sort of deconvolution.


I was part and beta testing and factory sounds and do not really know it too.
Anyway i also did not really ask as i invested my time in doing presets and waveforms for those.
I am not developer myself so even with a detailed explanation i would maybe not get the point. For sure i would have no clue if i would get insight into the code...

Markus mentioned to me that this was based on a idea he had in mind for a while but he didn't expect that it would end in a product like this so soon.

Let your head explode more about what you could do with the synth instead of how it works into detail. I am sure at some point this information will be available but not a few days after release.
For the start you could use the filter responses that MaxSynths and i posted here for free and also my additional explanations.


SODDI wrote:
Furthermore, a company that would get tetchy about an honest enthusiastic intellectual question like that from a customer who has purchased software from them previously is a company that I do not think I would like to do business with. Caution is one thing; paranoia is another.

Bye bye Tone 2.

I would comment on that in more detail but i promised to myself to keep as calm as possible.

Anyway there are also many positive comments here but sometimes they get lost in such discussions like this. First one was about the "Buy sounds" in the GUI (over several pages here!!) which first was unnecessary IMO and second should be fixed somehow in the future.


Ingo
Last edited by Ingonator on Wed Dec 05, 2012 12:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
Waldorf Beta Forum Manager
"Atmospheric Transients" for PPG Wave 3.V
"Analog vs Digital" for Blofeld
Win 7 64-bit / Live 9 / Reaper / Studio One 2.6 / Blofeld / Pulse 2 /Waldorf + Tone 2 plugins + others
TheoM
KVRAF
 
18996 posts since 4 Sep, 2001, from Melbourne Australia

Postby TheoM; Wed Dec 05, 2012 12:00 am

re_mute wrote:
TheoM wrote:
re_mute wrote:
TheoM wrote:
re_mute wrote:Yay, yet another piece of Tone2 software that doesn't work with the VST-RTAS wrapper.

How many frelling years is that now of asking them to please, please make a simple fix to their GUIs so I can give them some money?


you are kidding right? The vst rtas adapter is what needs an overhaul.

In fact it doesn't even officially support vst 2.4 plugins.



Oh, don't get me wrong, FXpansion are too busy blaming everyone else for their software's shitness and milking DCAM for all it's worth to bother updating the wrapper for, what, 6 years now.
But if Tone2 would at least have a dialogue with them then they could, like QuikQuak, have at least tried to get some basic functionality in there; but they wouldn't.

Looks like Sugar Bytes have beaten them to it anyway - http://www.sugar-bytes.de/content/products/TransVST/


hey that's great to see. did you try to see if the tone 2 works with sugar bytes? Good to see other devs not resting on their laurels with adapters



THey've taken it off of the website but I did email them asking if there was going to be a demo so we could see if stuff like Tone2's synth would work properly at last.

There's more info here:

http://www.440audio.com/en/software/v69 ... -TransVST/

VST to AAX wrapper
TransVST is a plugin wrapper, which transforms VST plugins into AAX Plugins.
With TransVST, you can use VST Plugins in Pro Tools 10 and higher.
TransVST runs as a standalone program which offers a luxurious plugin management and integrates any VST plugin in Pro Tools, so that it can be used as a normal AAX plugin. TransVST is already 64bit compatible and so it's ready for future Pro Tools versions. Furthermore, TransVST supports creative plugin functions like Midi Out, Sidechaining and Multi Outputs.

Features at a glance:
- Multi Output for Effects and Instruments
- Multi Input for Effects (Sidechaining)
- Midi Output
- AudioSuite support
- FXB/FXP Preset Import
- Stereo to Mono
- VST Shell support
- 64bit ready


wow why would they remove it? just yesterday it was available for purchase... weird.. :?
"Just call me shitload, cause I own a shitload of plugins!"
PreviousNext

Moderator: Moderators (Main)

Return to Instruments