Official Arturia VCollection5 thread

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

Post

SJ_Digriz wrote:
plexuss wrote:I think q better comparison is to dial them in so they sound as similar as possible. I dont think you can rely on using the same param values as it appears they changed they scaling. so far to my ears 4 and 5 sound the same. hopefully arturia will confirm or deny sound quality changes but so far no word.
They put out plenty of word before, during and after the update ... But, just to eliminate the debate.
Excellent thanks for that. I didn't notice a huge difference between the two. At some point I will fire up my Model D and do a comparison video.

Post

plexuss wrote:
SJ_Digriz wrote:
plexuss wrote:I think q better comparison is to dial them in so they sound as similar as possible. I dont think you can rely on using the same param values as it appears they changed they scaling. so far to my ears 4 and 5 sound the same. hopefully arturia will confirm or deny sound quality changes but so far no word.
They put out plenty of word before, during and after the update ... But, just to eliminate the debate.
Excellent thanks for that. I didn't notice a huge difference between the two. At some point I will fire up my Model D and do a comparison video.
The main thing it's missing is the oscillator buzziness. Just like my Voyager, it is just a hair dead sounding in comparison. The D has a much more open sound than either the plugin or the Voyager. Also, the filter in the plugin still does not track properly and never does achieve the "beyond fully open" state you can get with the envelope. And, speaking of the envelope, the plugin doesn't have the delayed decay correct.
If you have to ask, you can't afford the answer

Post

Ingonator wrote:
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).
Looking at several of the new ones the NKS mapping is completely botched, for example the B3 maps some of the organ drawbars but in a very haphazard way, just makes no sense why it would be like this. Some of the knobs make it switch presets too which should not be happening.

Post

plexuss wrote:
SJ_Digriz wrote:
plexuss wrote:I think q better comparison is to dial them in so they sound as similar as possible. I dont think you can rely on using the same param values as it appears they changed they scaling. so far to my ears 4 and 5 sound the same. hopefully arturia will confirm or deny sound quality changes but so far no word.
They put out plenty of word before, during and after the update ... But, just to eliminate the debate.
Excellent thanks for that. I didn't notice a huge difference between the two. At some point I will fire up my Model D and do a comparison video.
Here is a video interview with Glen Darcy, VP of Product Management.
In it, he discusses the re-code of the Mini V filter. You'll have to watch the whole thing, as I don't know the exact time where he talks about it. It's worth watching the whole interview regardless.
He also talks about how TAE is in a near-constant state of improvement, and how that is part of the updated Mini V filter. They will be continuing work in this vein on the other instruments.
One of the biggest shocker revelations to me is that Arturia is actually only a 30 person company, world-wide. :O ... I, and many others (even in this thread it's been mentioned several times) thought Arturia was a much larger company. .. That explains a few things, for sure. :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0BbH2N9eTw

Post

what a great show. Thanks for posting that. Giving Arturia a bit too much credit for bringing analog monosynths back ... they were about 5 years behind .. but other than that, it was an interesting take on things. I've actually seen the other guys like st joe before, and their shows are pretty awful. This one was pretty good.
If you have to ask, you can't afford the answer

Post

Due to my extreme laziness, I've not read this entire thread, I have read the product page though and I'm assuming that the synclavier doesn't include the sampling section. Please let me know if this is the case. If it has the factory sample set and a model of its resampling algorithm then I might go ahead and use my update and keep all this stuff. Anybody know for sure?
Don't F**K with Mr. Zero.

Post

Ah_Dziz wrote:... I'm assuming that the synclavier doesn't include the sampling section....
Synthesis only. No sampling section.
Anyone who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.

Post

Ah_Dziz wrote:Due to my extreme laziness, I've not read this entire thread, I have read the product page though and I'm assuming that the synclavier doesn't include the sampling section. Please let me know if this is the case. If it has the factory sample set and a model of its resampling algorithm then I might go ahead and use my update and keep all this stuff. Anybody know for sure?
It does not sample and you can't load samples. This is basically the FM synthesis version. Many would argue that the original product still had sampled tables, but this does not have access to any of that as far as I can tell. It's just an FM super workstation.

EDIT: I should say FM and additive ... And really really great for that. If you start to dig into the noise floor settings and bit depth settings etc.. It's really expanded from the original, minus sampling. Like many, I'm really hoping they add the option to load in our own samples to the time slice section.
If you have to ask, you can't afford the answer

Post

SJ_Digriz wrote: EDIT: I should say FM and additive ... And really really great for that. If you start to dig into the noise floor settings and bit depth settings etc.. It's really expanded from the original, minus sampling. Like many, I'm really hoping they add the option to load in our own samples to the time slice section.
And wavetable (sort of, if you consider the time slices). And there are patches in the library that seem to be based on analyzed/resynthesized time slices (like the acoustic pianos, trumpets, trombones, etc - basically look for the acoustic instruments). Anyway, the time slices would not use samples "per se" but through analysis/resynthesis, AFAIK (but yes, that addition would be great, although Synclavier V is already great in its current status).
Fernando (FMR)

Post

hmm I suppose its got some wavetable stink on it. But wavetable is really about scanning right? This is just pulling in fundamentals as far as I can tell, which is more about additive than wavetable. I'm probably being too pedantic. And it really doesn't matter :) I think some of the guys stuck on the lack of sample support are missing out on this thing. Even though I'd really like that as well. However, it is really a unique synth. Especially with the th dearth of interesting FM available. Again, for those just getting round to looking at it, make sure you get to the settings pages.
If you have to ask, you can't afford the answer

Post

SJ_Digriz wrote:hmm I suppose its got some wavetable stink on it. But wavetable is really about scanning right? This is just pulling in fundamentals as far as I can tell, which is more about additive than wavetable. I'm probably being too pedantic.
Each time slice is a different wave (created with a new additive set). So, since you are travelling through time slices, each with its own wave, for me it is wavetable scanning (of course, it always travels from slice 0 forward, and you only stop in the last time slice - you can't loop or go back and forth, for example). That's why I added "sort of". :wink:

And you can even create tuned sequences, since each slice can transpose independently (although I didn't went through that path yet).

Regarding sample support, at first I also was disappointed, but sampling in the Synclavier would not look that great, when compared to today standards in Kontakt, Falcon and the likes. It's the resynthesis option that I really was looking forward.
Fernando (FMR)

Post

SJ_Digriz wrote:
Ah_Dziz wrote:Due to my extreme laziness, I've not read this entire thread, I have read the product page though and I'm assuming that the synclavier doesn't include the sampling section. Please let me know if this is the case. If it has the factory sample set and a model of its resampling algorithm then I might go ahead and use my update and keep all this stuff. Anybody know for sure?
It does not sample and you can't load samples. This is basically the FM synthesis version. Many would argue that the original product still had sampled tables, but this does not have access to any of that as far as I can tell. It's just an FM super workstation.

EDIT: I should say FM and additive ... And really really great for that. If you start to dig into the noise floor settings and bit depth settings etc.. It's really expanded from the original, minus sampling. Like many, I'm really hoping they add the option to load in our own samples to the time slice section.
That makes me sad. I'll probably still end up upgrading this bundle though since the whole collection is only worth about a hundred bucks used apparently. Are people enjoying the other new additions?
Don't F**K with Mr. Zero.

Post

Ah_Dziz wrote:Are people enjoying the other new additions?
People who enjoy stuff like this are enjoying it, people who spend their lives worrying about font placement and -98db differences in waveform output have their usual torch and pitchfork out. I don't know which camp you usually fall in.
If you have to ask, you can't afford the answer

Post

positives:
-for the most part the new gui's are easier to read and have a more unified feel across all the plugins
-the new Farfisa and Synclavier are great plugins as far as I'm concerned .. with the caveats of missing features that could improve both.
-browsing for patches is now the same across all plugins -- but see below
-improved MM GUI by far better than the old one ... except the stupid cables don't bend out of your way.
-Mini Filter is clearer

negatives:
-the new browser is awful/simplistic/stupid/pointless
-broken functionality for hardware controllers (no multi button select, no chords, no preset) + other things that can't be called from the hardware stuff. I have a keylab 61, so it's a big deal to me.
-Lots of interface bugs that they are working on, but can be annoying depending on the plugins you use most
-AL2 is crap as far as I'm concerned. It's like they stripped it down for some reason. It's like an 1995 iTunes app but with updated graphics.
-a couple of the new gui's (solina) are terribly blurry


There's more in both categories, but those are the main things for me so far.
If you have to ask, you can't afford the answer

Post

SJ_Digriz wrote:
Ah_Dziz wrote:Are people enjoying the other new additions?
People who enjoy stuff like this are enjoying it, people who spend their lives worrying about font placement and -98db differences in waveform output have their usual torch and pitchfork out. I don't know which camp you usually fall in.
I'm more a fan of added useful modulation and things like integration between products and the way they handle things. As a person who used all hardware, both analog and digital, I could give a f**k if they tweaked some algorithms. Things have to sound pretty bad for me to cry. I was just curious if they had optimized anything or if the new stuff was over using CPU resources. Bummed bout the sampling on the synclavier emu.
Don't F**K with Mr. Zero.

Post Reply

Return to “Instruments”