True analog modeling?

[Urs]

SO I'm going to ask something pertaining to modeling here with Hive... hope it's not offensive, maybe someone can answer it. I see that the lfo's go very fast into AMing rates and I'm grateful for that. With all the classics, prophets, moogs, arps etc. you have been able to also do FMing with the oscillators. Since Hive is using basically static waves, where the cpu only has to calculate frequency, seems FM'ing would be relatively cheap on cpu.... not possible? omitted by design? Am I wrong?

The main objective of Hive is low CPU usage, paired with a quick workflow.

FM requires a decent amount of oversampling. Oversampling costs CPU. That would have meant posts like "Oh noes, Hive smoked my CPU!". So we figured, for a good initial reaction on our main objectives we wanted to omit such features.

We are however open to add a bunch of such features later, specificly hardsync and crossmodulation/FM

- Urs

[Nanners]

O.K., Thank you for your honesty, I was just curious as to how much cpu it would have taken. I really appreciate your time. Hive seems to be finding a home with guys and girls that are outside it's intended market (hehehe). It's a very capable and thoughtful instrument as is. It's becoming addictive fun as well.

[zerocrossing]

Energy is never created or destroyed...only changes forms.

So, what started this all was I bought ace...and I bought hive originally. Thinking I would have analog, and I would have modern virus type stuff covered. Unfortunately when I put hive next to ace ... well ace blew it up to be kind. They do not sit nicely together for me. I put hive down and wrote it off as a trance synth and an impulse buy.

So that's what started it all. After having this conversation I decided that I may have been comparing apples and oranges here. Hive may not have been what I was expecting, but maybe I was missing out on the point of it all. I mean... Urs and company have put an extreme amount of thought and education and experience into this thing. I know Urs knows what he is talking about. He and his team are very capable. So I put ace down and simply loaded hive up and tooled around with it today.

Can I say, I'm getting some very yamaha reminiscent sounds out of this lady. She is growing on me. EXM pad 3 ... Who ever you are... that is showing me the power of hive.

I have to say that posts like this make me laugh a bit. "Energy is never created or destroyed..." Classic! Tell that to my motivation now that I'm 50! I think a lot of us read too much sci-fi and Discovery Channel specials on quantum mechanics. It's very interesting and thought provoking, but I think it as so little to do with the world of plug in instruments, at least in any practical sense. (see also "analog heat shimmer.") What Urs?! You're not running a quantum tunneling sub routine in Diva! No wonder a Model D still sounds better! HIT THAT F'R WITH A HEISENBERG COMPENSATOR!

I also find it funny that so many electronic musicians are so "binary" on this topic. Analog or nothing. Hardware or nothing. I guess I consider myself technology agnostic. I don't care how an instrument makes the sound that it makes, as long as I like it. Too much talk has been made about "sampled waveforms" vs "calculated on-the-fly" waveforms. To me, I'm much more concerned about how the envelopes behave, or how the filter sounds when it's pushed into distortion. At the same time, I can love the pristine beauty of a pure additive synth where none of that comes into play... or the crazy digital ugliness of a C64 audio card.

[Dasheesh]

Hey zero crossing, we are not trying to devolve this into a digital vs thread are we? I mean, I thought that ended at least 10 years ago. This thread might have gotten side tracked with Hive but that's because it was such a departure from the norm from U-he in my and others opinion (apparently). I think Nanners was trying to pick Urs's brain a little about why he did things the way he did and to what end when clearly Diva and ACE have a higher sound quality. That's what I'm taking from it anyhoo. What I'm discovering personally is that "the best" is somewhat a subjective thing when, also clearly, Hive has a lovely and very new school rock tonal quality to it. And yes, it took a second for some of us to work that out, because, well ... the older offerings were more accurately and intensely modeled. But this new sound (and it's a new sound to me) is becoming quite addictive. I'm finding that Hive is a pretty kick ass player/song writing instrument that goes well beyond the club, trance, dance ... whatever the trend is now (I have no idea).

Also, knowing the thought that went into it made me go back and take yet another look at it when I had put it down... a lot of the old boards were appreciated not so much for their sound but because the build quality was so appreciated and loved. For some of us, it's about making a personal connection with an instrument.

[zerocrossing]

Hey zero crossing, we are not trying to devolve this into a digital vs thread are we? I mean, I thought that ended at least 10 years ago.

Well, while not a digital vs. thread, it's certianly has a "if it's not analog modeled correctly, it's lesser" kind of vibe to it. If you think the digital vs. analog thread was over 10 years ago, just spend some time over at Gearslutz for a bit and you'll see that many are still fighting that battle.

Is there something to that battle? Maybe. Like I said, I'm technology agnostic, but there sure is something special to my ears that comes from my Studio Electronics ATC-x. I was listening to some MFB Dominion 1 demos the other day and I thought I'd be hard pressed to get that sound from a plug in, not even Diva. Doesn't matter much to me, because there are so many other sounds gotten from plug ins, that to me the argument is moot.

The funny thing to me is that I never think of Diva as particularly "analog" sounding, though it sounds excellent. To me, the XILS-Labs synths sound a bit more analog, as does Oddity 2. The new SH-2 plug in from Roland actually blew me away, though I would not purchase it due to silly limitations like no velosity or aftertouch sensetivity. That's something U-he really does get right, and in my opinion that's far more important when the day is done.

Anyway, the thread is called "true analog modeling" which suggests that there is "fake analog modeling." I'm just saying that a synth either sounds good or does not. I had a 100% analog Arturia Minibrute for a while and to be honest, I didn't think it sounded very good most of the time.

[Nanners]

I just noticed the difference in depth and breath of modeling from ace to Hive and yes I felt I must be missing something there. "energy is never created or destroyed" is a basic fundamental law of physics, and maybe it was a corny thing to say but it just popped out of my mouth when Urs was discussing the energy that goes in is the same as the energy that comes out and I didn't go any farther with it than that.

It's like this... almost all software has gone to sampled wave forms because of the incessant bleeding about cpu hit whether you hear it or want to admit it or not it's obvious. No one said fake modeling, you put words in my mouth, but the degree and depth of modeling is obvious with the older software instruments. I was under the impression that as hardware got better so would the depth of modeling, but it seems to be going backwards. We have reached a point where the buyer (a mostly younger generation) has been raised with an iPhone in their hand and likes the sound of sampled wave forms... they recognize it unconsciously and think it sounds better. I was under the impression that U-he was one of the companies that knew the difference and was offering deeper and more accurate algorithms. So I wanted to know why he was going that way as well. I have a curious mind and it's obvious that this is how all software is going. I guess that's why U-he went this direction as well, and why I've found a need to reexamine my ideas about what is "better". I'm not beyond changing my mind or learning a new way of doing things if it's worth my while. I'm quite sure Urs would be able to build you an instrument that sounded very similar to or better than your dominion (which I really like by the way) but the hardware just isn't up to it. It hasn't been invented yet. The coding has surpassed the hardware. So smarter and more clever design is needed. This is the lesson I've learned. Engineering V.S. Design. Software is not competing with hardware any longer... it's doing it's own thing, it's apple and oranges. It two separate things now so use what sounds good. I have always preferred a modeled oscillator. But there are other offerings already out there for that. So I'm not complaining about Hive, just getting to know it better.

Don't just dismiss hive because it's gone the way of the millennial. It still has a very lovely modeled distortion to it that makes it "better" to me than other modern offerings. The filters are gorgeous, whether that's due to the modeled distortions or because of the very high signal to noise or the amount of modulation one can apply to them or the fact that they seem to be STEREO I don't know. Probably all the above.

[Nanners]

...and to that end, something to consider.

I'm a big fan of waldorf = sampled wave forms.

I like what I've heard of the new Modal = sampled wave forms (I think, haven't played with it).


So "hybrid synthesis" is the way of the future and rightly so because we have pure analog offerings everywhere and synthesis is about exploring new sounds right?

anyway...

[rod_zero]

I just noticed the difference in depth and breath of modeling from ace to Hive and yes I felt I must be missing something there.

Hive is not marketed as "true analog modeling" so your point is kind of moot, it is a virtual analog but doesnt claim to be "aunthentic" analog. As DIva or Ace

It's like this... almost all software has gone to sampled wave forms because of the incessant bleeding about cpu hit whether you hear it or want to admit it or not it's obvious..

False, I would say that when it comes to Software synths the ones using sampled waveforms are the minority.

No one said fake modeling, you put words in my mouth, but the degree and depth of modeling is obvious with the older software instruments. I was under the impression that as hardware got better so would the depth of modeling, but it seems to be going backwards.

Again false, it's the last generation of software instruments (diva, lush, xils stuff) which has raised the bar far above of what Arturia or G force did 9 years ago.

We have reached a point where the buyer (a mostly younger generation) has been raised with an iPhone in their hand and likes the sound of sampled wave forms... they recognize it unconsciously and think it sounds better.

Really non sense

I was under the impression that U-he was one of the companies that knew the difference and was offering deeper and more accurate algorithms. So I wanted to know why he was going that way as well..

So you are still assuming Hive uses sampled waveforms?

Don't just dismiss hive because it's gone the way of the millennial. It still has a very lovely modeled distortion to it that makes it "better" to me than other modern offerings. The filters are gorgeous, whether that's due to the modeled distortions or because of the very high signal to noise or the amount of modulation one can apply to them or the fact that they seem to be STEREO I don't know. Probably all the above.

What is your problem with Hive? instruments have to sound different in order to be significant, why u-he would make all their synths the same?

Have you ever played a waldorf synth (software or hardware)? That one not even tries to model analog and sounds incredible good.

I think that you have been deceived in to thinking that "analog is better".

[Dasheesh]

^^^You're not reading this thread. What software developers are doing now is wavetable technology without the table. They are using static waves in place of sweepable tables but its the same technology/implementation. Hive does have variable pulse width, which is it's one wave table, but other than that it's static waves, not modeled, thus the "sample based" description. Which is what almost all soft synths are doing now. It saves the cpu from having to calculate the cycle in real time. You can tell the difference, but it doesn't make it better or worse.. it is interesting that that is where we are headed because of the crying about cpu.

[Nanners]

Yeah, well.

Thank you for being so transparent with me Urs and giving with your time. Most would not have done the same.

I can see this is going to disintegrate into endless circles at this point, do what you want with the thread mods, but I have not been able to put down Hive since we started it.

I hope that the author of TRD doesn't mind but I have been stuck on that preset since finding it... it's a blast to play around with, and (I'm sure I will regret this for the rest of my days) but I fat fingered my way through a little ditty while drinking a cup of coffee to give an example of tonal quality for those that have not tried Hive or whatever at this point (it won't be up long). I can feel the vibration in my keyboard... I just love that.

[Howard]

@Nanners - yep, "Toy Rocket Dreams" is wonderfully old-school.
I'm sure u-he Viktor (who created that preset) will never speak to you again

BTW the original preset has a lot more/longer reverb in it. It's nice either way.

[Nanners]

I just turned down the reverb. Otherwise it's plain Hive. I just prefer the natural tone of instruments over effects. I think most presets have too much effects but it's easy enough to turn them down. I'll leave it up till tonight or maybe through this weekend if I forget. There are some impressive presets going through here. I think that one really shows off that naked quality I look for.

[Dasheesh]

I would never post this on the main forum. I'm doing it for Nanners, and Urs, and Howard (who very kindly tried to help me with ace), and PDX indy, who I related to on the forum, and there was another person who helped me out with ace who I forget the name of (my apologies), but my secret weapon is Bazille. It has the same modern U-he filters without the distortion models but character and tone in spades plus all the FMing, syncing etc...

One of the first things I did was create a patch called CONTACT which is still one of my favorites. I've done several iterations of it now. This is naked bazille, single patch and no production played on a keyboard and 2012 macbook pro. I won't leave it up long. I never do.

[Nanners]

^^^Personally, I really enjoyed that.

[zerocrossing]

...and to that end, something to consider.

I'm a big fan of waldorf = sampled wave forms.

I like what I've heard of the new Modal = sampled wave forms (I think, haven't played with it).


So "hybrid synthesis" is the way of the future and rightly so because we have pure analog offerings everywhere and synthesis is about exploring new sounds right?

anyway...

I've loved what I've heard of the Modal .002... I don't think it's quite "sampled" waveforms though, at least not in the way something like a Microwave is. The oscs do sound buttery smooth though, and offer a lot more than the traditional analog style waves. I've got a Prophet 12, and it does some very cool DSP waveforms that are not traditional waveforms. You can select a "center" and a "left and right" waveform and morph between them.

The analog filters of these hybrids do offer something though, that you won't get in a Virus. I'm most likely going to have another studio downsizing and I think I'm going to end up with a single analog monosynth and the Prophet 12 and Modulus .002 rack. The rest I'll do in software.