Official Arturia VCollection5 thread

VST, AU, AAX, CLAP, etc. Plugin Virtual Instruments Discussion
Post Reply New Topic

Post

zerocrossing wrote: but that still doesn't make me happy that a company feels they have the right to take up a lot of space on it just so each key graphic can be a unique snowflake. :roll: Also, the new plug ins take far too long to load because of this.
I agree with you.

If u-he can manage to offer different GUI screen sizes without blowing up the installer file, then so can others too.

Post

machinesworking wrote:I get the concern, but I don't get why it has to be that everyone else must agree with your concern?
Who demanded or even only implied that?

So far its been exactly the other way around: Those who apparently dont have a problem with the bloat expect everyone else to think like THEM, and if they dont they get insults thrown at them.
Last edited by ENV1 on Fri May 27, 2016 10:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Post

Numanoid wrote: If u-he can manage to offer different GUI screen sizes without blowing up the installer file, then so can others too.
I agree that U-He found an elegant solution. DIVA GUI, although not as complex as Arturias', has many knobs and panels, and scales well up to 200%. But who else has such a solution? The vast majority of the plug-ins don't even have scalable GUIs.

Besides, I was testing both v2 versions and v3 versions (these at 90% size - my display can't handle more) and neither the start time suffers nor the RAM consumption. So, the only con I found is the HD space taken by the high res bitmaps.
Last edited by fmr on Fri May 27, 2016 11:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Fernando (FMR)

Post

ENV1 wrote:
machinesworking wrote:I get the concern, but I don't get why it has to be that everyone else must agree with your concern?
Who demanded or even only implied that?

So far its been exactly the other way around: Those who apparently dont have a problem with the bloat expect everyone else to think like THEM, otherwise they get insults thrown at them.
I've posted mostly on the rest of the package and what I think of it. Mostly I see people asking if we can move on now to other areas of the software? I don't think that's an unreasonable request. Like I said there are at least 20 pages worth of people's feelings about the GUI bloat in the new version. Isn't that enough?

Post

machinesworking wrote:Like I said there are at least 20 pages worth of people's feelings about the GUI bloat in the new version. Isn't that enough?
Talking about it is not the problem, there is room for everything in this thread.

The problem is how some people talk to those who want to talk about it.

That is what creates the poisonous atmosphere.

If these people could simply accept other peoples views without getting all bent out of shape only because its not THEIR view then it would be smooth sailing for all of us.

Post

If I have to give up 6.5G or whatever it is for VCollection 5, oh well... nothing I can do about it. It's not ideal but it's not a deal breaker to me. I could see perhaps Arturia releasing them this way initially and then in the future looking to optimize file space. I would be with this prioritization of earlier release over optimizing the graphic file size. I would be very happy if Arturia said they were working on reducing file size for future update. However, if this is not on their roadmap, it's annoying but not a deal breaker for me at least.

Arturia? Are you working on optimizing the reduction of the file size foot print of VCollection 5? Is it on the roadmap? For when?

Post

here is my first try at voice synthesis using the Synclavier:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNxSpwMWVjM
...want to know how to program great synth sounds,check my video tutorials: http://www.youtube.com/user/sergiofrias25

Post

sergiofrias wrote:here is my first try at voice synthesis using the Synclavier...
Happy birthday! that's just crazy cool. a significant addition to the VCollection. I've been messing with the other new electro-mechanical instruments and they are quite musical. perhaps not 100% accurate but like all the others in the bundle they all capture the vibe of the originals and are very nice sounding. All that and the new GUIs and preset system and for me the upgrage was a good purchase. I really wish they would integrate support for old patches, seamlessly, as in they show up in the browser along with everything else perhaps in a bank/folder called Legacy.

Post

Hmm i'm not at all impressed with the authenticity of the piano, the EP's, or the B3 organ (others are good ish). So almost all V collection 5 new instruments are pointless for me. However i'm impressed with the synclavier, yet that costs more than the upgrade. However I can totally live without it especially with all the awesome hardware I have, so won't bite.

So many crash bugfixes in the release notes, really not fair to have to pay for fixes. They should put free crash fixes in the V4 versions at least. I really don't want to update, and spark is not part of it anyway, which is the one i use the most.

Post

aMUSEd wrote:Anyone else getting the 'not activated' dialogue coming up briefly when first loading these in a host? - just for a second or 2 on first load, then it seems to find the activation and afterwards I'm OK loading any of them.
I'm still getting this a lot - seems like there is a 2-3 second long lag in communication between the plugin and activation centre when the plugin is first loaded:
Arturia.jpg
This is not just in Komplete Kontrol, seems to happen in all hosts.

btw on the subject of Komplete Kontrol the param naming for the Synclavier is useless - all params have no logical name and user pages are just numbers. Param naming in the other plugins is also irrational, many have exactly the same name at the start of the param name meaning when automated they all look identical. Not clever!
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Post

aMUSEd wrote:
aMUSEd wrote:Anyone else getting the 'not activated' dialogue coming up briefly when first loading these in a host? - just for a second or 2 on first load, then it seems to find the activation and afterwards I'm OK loading any of them.
I'm still getting this a lot - seems like there is a 2-3 second long lag in communication between the plugin and activation centre when the plugin is first loaded:
Arturia.jpg
This is not just in Komplete Kontrol, seems to happen in all hosts.

btw on the subject of Komplete Kontrol the param naming for the Synclavier is useless - all params have no logical name and user pages are just numbers. Param naming in the other plugins is also irrational, many have exactly the same name at the start of the param name meaning when automated they all look identical. Not clever!
Found a similar problem with the NKS support of Synclavier V taht in this way does not seem to be found in the other plugins.

If Synclavier V is teh first plugin loaded in Komplete Kontrol it shows 16 pages (8 parmeters each) with generic parameter names. This seems to be the same as if you load a plugin that has no oficial NKS support yet (from the plugin list in teh File menu of Komplete Kontrol).

If in Komplete Kontrol i load a preset of another plugin ike e.g. Mini V and then Synclavier V the parameters used after loading a Synclavier V preset seem to be those of Mini V in that case.

So the NKS support of Synclavier indeed does not seem to work properly with the current version, opopsing to other plugins in the collection (have not checked the NKS presets of all V-Collection 5 plugins yet).
Ingo Weidner
Win 10 Home 64-bit / mobile i7-7700HQ 2.8 GHz / 16GB RAM //
Live 10 Suite / Cubase Pro 9.5 / Pro Tools Ultimate 2021 // NI Komplete Kontrol S61 Mk1

Post

mnmlfrk wrote:@Arturia You have updated the Mini V Filter, but not the other products. Will there be engine improvements for the other old ones too? Like ARP2600 and Prophet?
Yes that will come out in 6 weeks as a $199 paid update and will eat another 2gb of space. :hihi:

Post

Count yourself lucky. They don't 'have' to do this after all.
Anyone who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.

Post

RAM usage has been brought up, so heres some real world data on that aspect.


Usage

minimoog V2: 25,4MB / Has only 1 fixed size

minimoog V3: 74,2MB @ 60% UI Size

minimoog V3: 77,0MB @ 70% UI Size

minimoog V3: 77,2MB @ 80% UI Size

minimoog V3: 76,8MB @ 90% UI Size

minimoog V3: 77,0MB @ 100% UI Size

minimoog V3: 93,5MB @ 120% UI Size

minimoog V3: 90,9MB @ 140% UI Size

minimoog V3: 105,0MB @ 160% UI Size

minimoog V3: 103,6MB @ 180% UI Size

minimoog V3: 107,0MB @ 200% UI Size


Test Method

- Load plugin, let RAM usage settle, write down value

- Switch to next greater size, close plugin

- Load plugin, let RAM usage settle, write down value

- Rinse, repeat

Host used was SAVIHost since it needs almost no RAM for itself.

Tested on Win7/32, the values for the 64bit versions would therefore probably be a little higher.


Notes and Observations

RAM usage always starts out a certain percentage higher than what the 'end-usage' will be. Usually it will take about 10 to 15 seconds after startup until it 'settles'. RAM usage is also not perfectly stable after it settled, theres always some ups and downs every now and then, typically somewhere in the 500KB to 1MB range, but it can occasionally be more. RAM usage total of V3 can go as high as 144MB if the user switches through all sizes without restarting the plugin after each size-switch. The fact that occasionally a larger size appears to be needing less RAM than a smaller size is most likely due to the above mentions ups and downs.


Conclusion

At the smallest size (60%), minimoog V3 needs on average roughly three times the RAM of V2.

At the largest size (200%), minimoog V3 needs on average over four times the RAM of V2. (Roughly four and a quarter.)

Post

ENV1 wrote:RAM usage has been brought up, so heres some real world data on that aspect.
What did you use to measure memory consumption?
Fernando (FMR)

Post Reply

Return to “Instruments”