Hello!
For those who already spent enough time with Falcon...do you find it as "the one to rule them all" synth? Both sound and possibility wise?
Thx
Falcon questions
-
- KVRAF
- 7755 posts since 15 Sep, 2005 from East Coast of the USA
You can do just about anything with it; granular, analog synth sounds, FM, this... that...whatever.. ..the kitchen sink..HcDoom wrote:Hello!
For those who already spent enough time with Falcon...do you find it as "the one to rule them all" synth? Both sound and possibility wise?
Thx
Other synths may have a quicker way (depending on the synth) to get at those same functions, but not have as many possibilities as Falcon.
For most things, Synthmaster is a bit easier to use (and much less $$). There is no granular synthesis in SM, but they did mention that will be in version 3.0.
-
- KVRAF
- 21196 posts since 8 Oct, 2014
I've yet to find that one synth to rule them all because each synth has its own character. Falcon can't sound like Serum. I proved that by importing Serum WTs into Falcon and using the same settings, as close as possible, I can't get the sounds exactly the same.
So no, IMO, there is no one synth to rule them all.
Not even Falcon, that I love very much.
So no, IMO, there is no one synth to rule them all.
Not even Falcon, that I love very much.
-
- KVRist
- 446 posts since 14 Dec, 2014
On top of my list at the moment. Currently I am in need of a versatile sample player (to recreate perfect copies of some old fav soundfont patches of mine) and a versatile subtractive synth (again recreating some old sounds) as well. Falcon excels at both it seems. Again: this is what I conclude from the info I got, never used it myself yet.
What I also appreciate: it doesn't claim to be an incarnation of some old synth. Getting really tired of all those incarnations of an old synth with an awkward interface.
What I also appreciate: it doesn't claim to be an incarnation of some old synth. Getting really tired of all those incarnations of an old synth with an awkward interface.
Dúnedain
-
- KVRAF
- 7755 posts since 15 Sep, 2005 from East Coast of the USA
Ok, but it is tough to only say things about Falcon and not compare to other products on the market.HcDoom wrote:Please talk about your experience with Falcon...
-
- KVRist
- 455 posts since 16 May, 2012 from Antwerp
this is my personal opinion after about one year of using Falcon:
Negative: It does not really 'feel' like a synth. It is more like a crossbreed between what a synth can be and a sampler like Kontakt. It has its own a personal language and you have to get used to that. It's imperative to read the manual.
Positive:
- There have been some glitches in the past, but UVI's helpdesk is really very good and they take every contact seriously and do all they can to help.
- Once you get past that initial Falcon's way of doing things, it becomes easier to use and when it comes to combining parts to get your sound, even the sky is no limit anymore.
- It comes with a few of the Ircam oscillators which is, for me, a reason to jump on the train.
- It's effects are really top quality.
- I have used Kontakt longer than Falcon, but it did not take long before Falcon became the easier to use.
- Its strengths are the quailty of its parts and the way it is structured. Reminds me a bit of 'Lego'.
- The manual is an example of how manuals should be.
Overall opinion: It does not replace other synths nor Kontakt for me. It is arguably the least 'sexy' synth I ever used, but its seriousness and quality make it one of my favourites. It is mainly a synth for those who enjoy creating sound. It can be a bit overwhelming at first because there are so many options but this gets better over time. I am far from a synth collectioner - I only have seven, eight when I add Kontakt, which I already consider to be a lot - but I am glad Falcon is one of them. On the other hand: it never gave me the excitement I felt when using Zebra or Absynth or Chromaphone.
One last, and very critical remark: don't go for the Groove 3 course by Eli Kranzberg. He explains things like as if he has to catch a plane in an hour or so.
Negative: It does not really 'feel' like a synth. It is more like a crossbreed between what a synth can be and a sampler like Kontakt. It has its own a personal language and you have to get used to that. It's imperative to read the manual.
Positive:
- There have been some glitches in the past, but UVI's helpdesk is really very good and they take every contact seriously and do all they can to help.
- Once you get past that initial Falcon's way of doing things, it becomes easier to use and when it comes to combining parts to get your sound, even the sky is no limit anymore.
- It comes with a few of the Ircam oscillators which is, for me, a reason to jump on the train.
- It's effects are really top quality.
- I have used Kontakt longer than Falcon, but it did not take long before Falcon became the easier to use.
- Its strengths are the quailty of its parts and the way it is structured. Reminds me a bit of 'Lego'.
- The manual is an example of how manuals should be.
Overall opinion: It does not replace other synths nor Kontakt for me. It is arguably the least 'sexy' synth I ever used, but its seriousness and quality make it one of my favourites. It is mainly a synth for those who enjoy creating sound. It can be a bit overwhelming at first because there are so many options but this gets better over time. I am far from a synth collectioner - I only have seven, eight when I add Kontakt, which I already consider to be a lot - but I am glad Falcon is one of them. On the other hand: it never gave me the excitement I felt when using Zebra or Absynth or Chromaphone.
One last, and very critical remark: don't go for the Groove 3 course by Eli Kranzberg. He explains things like as if he has to catch a plane in an hour or so.
Last edited by ErikH on Sun Dec 04, 2016 5:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Windows 7, Cubase 9.5 and some extra plug-ins | Takamine EN-10C and PRS Mira
-
Echoes in the Attic Echoes in the Attic https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=180417
- KVRAF
- 11054 posts since 12 May, 2008
I owned it for a while and there were some things I really liked about it, like the huge flexibility in sound sources laid out over different key zones, the granular and other sampling modes, the nice effects and ability to use them per voice, the MPE support and other stuff.
However for me personally I didn't love the workflow, but not necessarily because it's a bad design, it's just so flexibility that it is necessarily a bit complicated. I actually find Kontakt easier to navigate for example. I would have been able to deal with it if the sound blew me away, however that wasn't the case. Despite all it's power, I found that I just preferred the sound of other synths. I prefer the sound of other fm synths to it's fm module, I prefer other organ sounds to its organ module, I prefer other VA synths to it's analog type stuff, same for other pm/pluck sounds and wavetable stuff. Some of these modules I even found had too big of an unpleasant range, I in particular did not like the wavetable osc. This isn't to say Falcon can't make a variety of nice sounds, it can of course, it was just a matter of preference for me to use other options that did similar things.
It really will come down to your own preference in sound and workflow. Nobody can argue about its power and flexibility. But not everyone will enjoy using it.
Development seems to go at a good pace and the support is quite excellent though so if it works for you then I think it's a great choice. Too bad there is no demo so it will take buying it to find out.
However for me personally I didn't love the workflow, but not necessarily because it's a bad design, it's just so flexibility that it is necessarily a bit complicated. I actually find Kontakt easier to navigate for example. I would have been able to deal with it if the sound blew me away, however that wasn't the case. Despite all it's power, I found that I just preferred the sound of other synths. I prefer the sound of other fm synths to it's fm module, I prefer other organ sounds to its organ module, I prefer other VA synths to it's analog type stuff, same for other pm/pluck sounds and wavetable stuff. Some of these modules I even found had too big of an unpleasant range, I in particular did not like the wavetable osc. This isn't to say Falcon can't make a variety of nice sounds, it can of course, it was just a matter of preference for me to use other options that did similar things.
It really will come down to your own preference in sound and workflow. Nobody can argue about its power and flexibility. But not everyone will enjoy using it.
Development seems to go at a good pace and the support is quite excellent though so if it works for you then I think it's a great choice. Too bad there is no demo so it will take buying it to find out.
-
- KVRist
- 446 posts since 14 Dec, 2014
About the waveforms used in these 2:
Can we just pick 5 waveforms (didn't counted noise)? How do they sound/look? Are they hars/bright (I define it as "perfect" discrete approximations of mathematically perfect waveforms) or are they a bit more warm/smoothened?
I think hars/bright waveforms are more easy to shape with a filter + key follow.
Can we just pick 5 waveforms (didn't counted noise)? How do they sound/look? Are they hars/bright (I define it as "perfect" discrete approximations of mathematically perfect waveforms) or are they a bit more warm/smoothened?
I think hars/bright waveforms are more easy to shape with a filter + key follow.
Dúnedain
-
- KVRAF
- 3054 posts since 25 Apr, 2011
Analog Saw:Dúnedain wrote:About the waveforms used in these 2:
Can we just pick 5 waveforms (didn't counted noise)? How do they sound/look? Are they hars/bright (I define it as "perfect" discrete approximations of mathematically perfect waveforms) or are they a bit more warm/smoothened?
Analog Stack Saw:
Analog Wavetable (default build-in):
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
- KVRAF
- 3054 posts since 25 Apr, 2011
Falcon is very "clean" to begin with. No coloration was added out of the box. As you can see on the screens i made. These SAW examples display very clean sounding waves. Bright and without distortion.Dúnedain wrote:About the waveforms used in these 2:
Can we just pick 5 waveforms (didn't counted noise)? How do they sound/look? Are they hars/bright (I define it as "perfect" discrete approximations of mathematically perfect waveforms) or are they a bit more warm/smoothened?
It is the same on all other build-in wave(table)s.
-
- KVRist
- 446 posts since 14 Dec, 2014
That is good to hear. As I said before: I think hars/bright waveforms are more easy to shape with the right filter + key follow. I want to color it myself.exmatproton wrote:Falcon is very "clean" to begin with. No coloration was added out of the box. As you can see on the screens i made. These SAW examples display very clean sounding waves. Bright and without distortion.Dúnedain wrote:About the waveforms used in these 2:
Can we just pick 5 waveforms (didn't counted noise)? How do they sound/look? Are they hars/bright (I define it as "perfect" discrete approximations of mathematically perfect waveforms) or are they a bit more warm/smoothened?
It is the same on all other build-in wave(table)s.
Dúnedain
