KVR Audio

EvilDragon · Post by **EvilDragon** » Fri Apr 29, 2016 8:19 pm

Urs gave away which is the most accurate model out of 5 to their unit.

What can I say... I'm glad I was right

AnX · Post by **AnX** » Fri Apr 29, 2016 8:32 pm

EvilDragon wrote:Urs gave away which is the most accurate model out of 5 to their unit.

What can I say... I'm glad I was right

I've never knowingly been wrong.

KnickersDown · Post by **KnickersDown** » Fri Apr 29, 2016 10:48 pm

AnX wrote:If you didnt vote #3, you dont deserve a synth like this. Its that simple.

Yes! Amen to that.

Nokenoku · Post by **Nokenoku** » Sat Apr 30, 2016 12:51 am

shroom81 wrote:
urosh wrote: BTW, something always bothered me with Diva envelopes but I thought that I imagined things, but RePro does resonant blips very good, so I'm back to theory that something is weird with Diva envs
I'm afraid I have to second that, I used to have a Juno-6 and the envelopes on it were a lot faster then Diva's. I would love to be able to make snappy stabs with Diva. Faster envelopes pretty please ?

+1
Something about the envelopes of DIVA is strange.

Also I find it especially hard to get the right amount of Decay time, since the interesting range for snappy stuff has like 1mm on the knob (while the uninteresting areas before and after get a lot more space/resolution).

wagtunes · Post by **wagtunes** » Sat Apr 30, 2016 2:01 am

After walking away from this for 46 pages, I finally ran through more tests and this is what I personally came up with.

1 is just a train wreck. Too many artifacts.

5 is smooth but dull.

3 is actually out of tune at self oscillation.

2 is just slightly better than 1.

4 is the best of the lot to my ears.

Having said all that, I like Diva's filters much better. There is no contest.

aaron aardvark · Post by **aaron aardvark** » Sat Apr 30, 2016 3:19 am

EvilDragon wrote:Urs gave away which is the most accurate model out of 5 to their unit.

What can I say... I'm glad I was right

Which one?

V0RT3X · Post by **V0RT3X** » Sat Apr 30, 2016 3:44 am

Ok after having another go at it inside bitwig. I like 5 the best with 4 as my second favourite.

I set up the Bitwig LFO tool to make multiple parameter changes to Repro so i got a pretty good idea of all the nice little changes.

The only thing this is making me want now, is a real Pro-one and some real analog synthesizers.

this must be a good sign.

EvilDragon · Post by **EvilDragon** » Sat Apr 30, 2016 6:16 am

aaron aardvark wrote:
EvilDragon wrote:Urs gave away which is the most accurate model out of 5 to their unit.

What can I say... I'm glad I was right
Which one?

3.

hakey · Post by **hakey** » Sat Apr 30, 2016 6:24 am

EvilDragon wrote:Urs gave away which is the most accurate model out of 5 to their unit.

Urs implied that filter 3 is the most expensive algorithm. In one aspect at least, filter 4 is closer to the behaviour of uhe's pro one.

(that said, at non-extreme settings they all sound pretty much the same to me.)

Ingonator · Post by **Ingonator** » Sat Apr 30, 2016 6:39 am

EvilDragon wrote:
aaron aardvark wrote:
EvilDragon wrote:Urs gave away which is the most accurate model out of 5 to their unit.

What can I say... I'm glad I was right
Which one?
3.

Wow if that's true it looks like i was right with my vote and my corresponding first post here...

I did also not change my mind about over the time this thread was going on while i agree that filter 4 seems to be nice too.

core · Post by **core** » Sat Apr 30, 2016 7:56 am

I never had a clue which one was most analog but I still like 4 the best.

kybernaut · Post by **kybernaut** » Sat Apr 30, 2016 9:01 am

hakey wrote:
EvilDragon wrote:Urs gave away which is the most accurate model out of 5 to their unit.
Urs implied that filter 3 is the most expensive algorithm.

This is what I suspected from day 1...

Interesting though how this fits together with the poll results

So probably best to just use #4 for the final product...

cheers,
kybernaut_01

Vesius · Post by **Vesius** » Sat Apr 30, 2016 10:01 am

I became more convinced by 3's quality over time, as it aliased less than 4 under extreme modulation (particularly noticeable using headphones, I found). However, I voted for 4 due to the sheer level of punchiness it had - which may well be fed by aliasing tbf. Knowing what we know now, I suspect that 4 is the more expensive unit delay model.

Ultimately, I didn't feel that 1,2 or 5 were in the same league as 3 and 4. In the end it was a real coin flip for me between these two. Having said, there are many, many situations where I'd be completely happy to use any of these filters.

EnGee · Post by **EnGee** » Sat Apr 30, 2016 10:05 am

EvilDragon wrote:
aaron aardvark wrote:
EvilDragon wrote:Urs gave away which is the most accurate model out of 5 to their unit.

What can I say... I'm glad I was right
Which one?
3.

Oh wow! I'm really happy! Not because I chose #3 but because it means I don't need to replace my monitors anytime soon

hakey · Post by **hakey** » Sat Apr 30, 2016 10:11 am

Vesius wrote:I became more convinced by 3's quality over time

I became more convinced once I knew it was the expensive algorithm. The difference is night and day.

KVR Audio

Repro-1 (out now)

To your ears, which filter behaves most analogue