Getting Hive?

[Urs]

Holds but seams not for very long.

Well, hopefully long enough that a synth like yours can be processed in GHz samplerate in realtime, or at least at, say, 250MHz.

[S0lo]

Holds but seams not for very long.

Well, hopefully long enough that a synth like yours can be processed in GHz samplerate in realtime, or at least at, say, 250MHz.

Hopefully , but to be honest I think that would be a hard projection to make. Here are some charts that I've been browsing.

http://preshing.com/20120208/a-look-bac ... rformance/

There seams to be some improvement, but the numbers don't seam to crunch well to allow us decent X32 or even X64 oversampling in the next 5 years. Unless intel/AMD sum up some major improvements.

Not that I'm really a fan of oversampling . If you ask me, I personally think it's overused some times.

[wagtunes]

To the OP, this may or may not help you in your decision. A short demo of Hive I just put together. No songs. Just individual sounds so you can hear them clearly. No FX added other than what's in Hive itself.

https://soundcloud.com/steven-wagenheim ... new-sounds

[Dasheesh]

Oh yeah, I totally forgot about this one (thanks for the reminder WAGS). More then a year ago a buddy asked me if they could hear what Hive sounded like. I choose some presets that I liked and just spontaneously played around with it so he could hear it. Just a friendly exchange between buddies. About a year ago now the Topic of Hive came up on this board and I had just signed up for a new player service to check out called hearthis. Anyway, I found that sample of Hive on my hard drive and converted it to MP3 and uploaded it as a test run. Remarkably it shot to the most listened to track of the week so I left it up.

Looks like it hasn't gotten a lot of hits since then, but this is a good idea of how expressive Hive is. Somewhere in the middle I reached for the filter cut off and it was already open so there is a little jump but it's just a spontaneous example.

There is a compressor and an EQ on a summing channel, but it's MP3 anyway so what ever, It's still up and this is a Hive thread.

https://hearthis.at/jcme-yn/

[Soarer]

Thanks for the demos.

Dasheesh is that Hive? Sounds really analog! It's not Diva?

[Dasheesh]

Just Hive, a compressor, and a parametric style eq.

[fluffy_little_something]

I am more and more convinced that EQ is the key to the sound of a synth. After all, properties such as metallic, bright, dull, lacking bottom, and even fat and thin, or analog vs digital can be corrected/achieved by equalization to a large extent, be it an external EQ or maybe an EQ profile hardwired within the sound engine.

For that reason I wish synths had better internal EQ's, especially graphic equalizers with a dozen or so bands.

[nineofkings]

I am more and more convinced that EQ is the key to the sound of a synth. After all, properties such as metallic, bright, dull, lacking bottom, and even fat and thin, or analog vs digital can be corrected/achieved by equalization to a large extent, be it an external EQ or maybe an EQ profile hardwired within the sound engine.

For that reason I wish synths had better internal EQ's, especially graphic equalizers with a dozen or so bands.

Only to an extent. The thing about EQ is that it's global, whereas synths generate sound per voice. You might EQ a perfectly creamy sound in octave 4, but play in octave 5 and it sounds boomy and terrible. Not to mention time-varying factors like dynamics, phase, and drift.

[fluffy_little_something]

Only to an extent. The thing about EQ is that it's global, whereas synths generate sound per voice. You might EQ a perfectly creamy sound in octave 4, but play in octave 5 and it sounds boomy and terrible. Not to mention time-varying factors like dynamics, phase, and drift.

Well, I never hear people say, a given synth sounds thin or metallic or analog on the 3rd or 5th octave
They say the synth sounds metallic or analog or whatever, period.

[pdxindy]

I am more and more convinced that EQ is the key to the sound of a synth. After all, properties such as metallic, bright, dull, lacking bottom, and even fat and thin, or analog vs digital can be corrected/achieved by equalization to a large extent, be it an external EQ or maybe an EQ profile hardwired within the sound engine.

For that reason I wish synths had better internal EQ's, especially graphic equalizers with a dozen or so bands.

Exactly one of the reasons I like Zebra... it has 2 capable 4 band EQ modules... plus there are 2 regular VCF's that can also do EQ'ing and 2 Distortion modules which can do quite a bit of sound shaping as well... and that is just in the FX section.

There are also a variety of ways to EQ the sound up in the per voice module section.

And all those modules can be modulated! Plus because there are multiple channels, it is easy to EQ one part of the sound separate from another part of the sound.

[Soarer]

...For that reason I wish synths had better internal EQ's, especially graphic equalizers with a dozen or so bands.

Agree. I always add an EQ to a synth track so developers might as well add a good EQ so it can be saved in the preset. I think something like 8 bands should be enough though.

[nineofkings]

Only to an extent. The thing about EQ is that it's global, whereas synths generate sound per voice. You might EQ a perfectly creamy sound in octave 4, but play in octave 5 and it sounds boomy and terrible. Not to mention time-varying factors like dynamics, phase, and drift.

Well, I never hear people say, a given synth sounds thin or metallic or analog on the 3rd or 5th octave
They say the synth sounds metallic or analog or whatever, period.

That's my point . If the synth doesn't have it, you can't always EQ it into existence, cause it'll only fix one or two octaves.

[pdxindy]

Only to an extent. The thing about EQ is that it's global, whereas synths generate sound per voice. You might EQ a perfectly creamy sound in octave 4, but play in octave 5 and it sounds boomy and terrible. Not to mention time-varying factors like dynamics, phase, and drift.

Some synths like Zebra can also do per voice EQ'ing... then you can do key tracking and modulate over time for poly patches.

[fluffy_little_something]

Only to an extent. The thing about EQ is that it's global, whereas synths generate sound per voice. You might EQ a perfectly creamy sound in octave 4, but play in octave 5 and it sounds boomy and terrible. Not to mention time-varying factors like dynamics, phase, and drift.

Well, I never hear people say, a given synth sounds thin or metallic or analog on the 3rd or 5th octave
They say the synth sounds metallic or analog or whatever, period.

That's my point . If the synth doesn't have it, you can't always EQ it into existence, cause it'll only fix one or two octaves.

Basically equalizers are just sets of filter.
What do you mean by if the synth doesn't have it? The frequency response of synths is continuous, there are no missing frequencies. So you can amplify any frequencies.

When I say the synth lacks bottom, I can amplify low frequencies, 1 or 2 octaves as you suggest. Yes, it will not affect the sound of bells 4 octaves higher. But that was not the problem to begin with, the missing bottom was and that got fixed.

[Dasheesh]

I like your balls Fluffy. I don't always see things the way you do and I don't usually agree but you can hold your own and are not afraid.

I have a question for you that is an honest question. In sylenth (I am NOT trying to hijack this thread!) but in sylenth. There are two layers, each with a filter. Then there is a third filter knob. I think it's called filter control or something. Does that control the cutoff of both filters at the same time? or does it add a 3rd filter cutoff? it's an honest question.