SoloRack v1.0 is here

[S0lo]

But it seams that hardware acceleration was dropped out after Win Vista/7 in favor of DirectX!

DX is also hardware accellerated, if the GPU supports it (and they all do). It's just an API, much like GDI and GDI+ are. No?

There seams to be some contradicting information out there regarding GDI+. I'm still not sure, but I'm currently under the impression (from what I've read so far) that it was hardware accelerated in Win 2000/XP, but not in Win7/8/10 (i.e not supported by driver/GPU). In my actual/practical experience, GDI+ is very slow (compared to plain GDI) in both of my Win7 test machines. And several other users reported GUI problems that stems from that slowness (one of them was Win10). For that, I find it hard for me to believe that it's hardware accelerated at least in the PCs I've tested. May be I'm wrong. But I've seen several other users in several coding forums complain about GDI+ slowness.

My current conclusion is that I may have to some day move to DirectX, or essentially Direct2D. Although there are some caveats to that for me. In the mean time I have some work arounds that will be there in the next update.

[EvilDragon]

Yeah, you should probably move to D2D. Or even OpenGL. Some plugins offer OGL rendering optionally (Tokyo Dawn Labs, UVI in Falcon, for example), some require it (NI more recent products: compressors, EQs, Replika, Driver).

[S0lo]

I'm thinking about replacing the Wild/Tame switch on the S602 delay module with a switch that allows you to preserve the first reflection no matter what feedback setting you have.

The side effect of that is all current presets that use the Wild mode will sound like there are in Tame mode.

What do you guys think about this?

[martin_l]

I'm thinking about replacing the Wild/Tame switch on the S602 delay module with a switch that allows you to preserve the first reflection no matter what feedback setting you have.

The side effect of that is all current presets that use the Wild mode will sound like there are in Tame mode.

What do you guys think about this?

Why not add an alternative version? Having more modules available should not affect efficiency and cpu usage, as long as they are not in use.

Or, just add a simple delay without any feedback. It can always be added with a mixer, and you would need that if you wanted to add a filter or other modules into the feedback path.

Martin

[S0lo]

Why not add an alternative version? Having more modules available should not affect efficiency and cpu usage, as long as they are not in use.

It just feels a bit odd to add an almost identical module except for one function.

Or, just add a simple delay without any feedback. It can always be added with a mixer, and you would need that if you wanted to add a filter or other modules into the feedback path.

Makes sense, but the real beauty is to have it all with the "clock in" and "CV in" for time. I could put it all into a small module, but hmmm, again not sure thats different enough.

[martin_l]

Hi Solo,

Why not add an alternative version? Having more modules available should not affect efficiency and cpu usage, as long as they are not in use.

It just feels a bit odd to add an almost identical module except for one function.

my personal opinion: virtual modules don't take space (and in case of similar modules, or several variants of a module don't cost much in terms of development).
I do see the issue of screen real estate for modules you are using. You don't want to have to increase the width of a module only to accommodate one further switch. So I would not mind having different variants of basically the same module.

In case of the feedback behaviour of the delay, I don't think anybody is going to switch that behaviour during one performance. You rather want to decide which behaviour to use before building the patch.

Another example would be the mixer module. I think it would be great to have a variant which allows negative gain values. Yes, you could achieve that with the additional module, but again, I think screen real estate is the bigger concern.

Or, just add a simple delay without any feedback. It can always be added with a mixer, and you would need that if you wanted to add a filter or other modules into the feedback path.

Makes sense, but the real beauty is to have it all with the "clock in" and "CV in" for time. I could put it all into a small module, but hmmm, again not sure thats different enough.

Well, if you just add a variant where the first delay is always unattenuated, you automatically get all the other features. Or, have a module with all the features, but no feedback at all. Or both...


In general, as you have seen in the Softube thread, I don't think many people see the Solorack as a direct comparison to the Softube Modular. As you yourself say, you are not trying to emulate the Doepfer, or any other specific module.

I guess, in order to really have something to stand out against the Softube, it should be complexity. The ability to build really big patches at acceptable CPU is a big plus, and I guess you should build on that, by providing a much larger range of modules (including more free -- i.e. included in System B -- utility modules, or different variants of the modules).

Having a large number of modules and bigger flexibility would be a good selling point. I would not be too concerned about confusing the user with different modules. A modular is not meant for the beginner anyway. Probably, most people who would jump into that world, would either already have the experience, or at least the curiosity and willingness to experiment and to investigate the modules.


Cheers,
Martin

[S0lo]

my personal opinion: virtual modules don't take space (and in case of similar modules, or several variants of a module don't cost much in terms of development).
I do see the issue of screen real estate for modules you are using. You don't want to have to increase the width of a module only to accommodate one further switch. So I would not mind having different variants of basically the same module.

In case of the feedback behaviour of the delay, I don't think anybody is going to switch that behaviour during one performance. You rather want to decide which behaviour to use before building the patch.

Another example would be the mixer module. I think it would be great to have a variant which allows negative gain values. Yes, you could achieve that with the additional module, but again, I think screen real estate is the bigger concern.

Never mind, I just added a 3rd option on the same switch, for "Tame + 1st". which will keep the first reflection. I know it's not ideal, but does the job

Regarding the mixer, some times this called a polarizing mixer, or a attenuverting mixer. It is a good idea and it crosses my mind from time to time. I think I'll eventually do it.

In general, as you have seen in the Softube thread, I don't think many people see the Solorack as a direct comparison to the Softube Modular. As you yourself say, you are not trying to emulate the Doepfer, or any other specific module.

I guess, in order to really have something to stand out against the Softube, it should be complexity. The ability to build really big patches at acceptable CPU is a big plus, and I guess you should build on that, by providing a much larger range of modules (including more free -- i.e. included in System B -- utility modules, or different variants of the modules).

Having a large number of modules and bigger flexibility would be a good selling point. I would not be too concerned about confusing the user with different modules. A modular is not meant for the beginner anyway. Probably, most people who would jump into that world, would either already have the experience, or at least the curiosity and willingness to experiment and to investigate the modules.

I agree with you. flexibility, variety, cpu usage and ease of use will all add up. At the end it all depends on what someone wants. For some one who can't afford the hardware, he may want to go for emulation if he like this or that sound. For some one else who already has some hardware, it might appeal to him adding more variety and functionality, specially if he is constrained by the case/rack size/budget. I think people at muffwiggler.com are more from this category. I could be wrong offcourse .

Having said that, I haven't disregarded possible emulation in future modules. As you might have noticed that three of the filters in SoloRack are actually modified circuit level models of well known analog filters.

[S0lo]

I would like to tell you guys that Beta 2 has been released including two new utility modules. Details here: http://www.solostuff.net/2017/06/07/sol ... -released/

Here is the list of updates:

- New module, S705 Gate Length Processor
- New module, S704 Dual Gate to Trigger Converter
- Added "Tame + 1st" mode to the switch in S602 VC Delay. This will force the first reflection to always occur no matter what feedback you use.
- The sample and hold section in S516 can now be triggered by the internal random gate generator when there is no clock connected (Thanks to martin_l).
- Improved GUI performance.
- Added sluggish GUI workarrounds. "LEDs always ON" option and "CPU lite cables" option.
- Changed default location of data folder to "My Documets\SoloRack"
- Added Custom data folder feature using paths.ini file
- Fixed high CPU and high resonations while oversampling in S212 VCF.
- Fxied high CPU in S205 LPG
- Fixed bug in S500 ADSR working in exponential instead of liniear curve
- Less frequent demo mode noises.
- Added installer

[S0lo]

Oh, I almost forgot this one:

- The sample and hold section in S516 can now be triggered by the internal random gate generator when there is no clock connected (Thanks to martin_l ).

[RPH]

Excellent, thanks for the update!

[cerodios]

Hey, I just wanna say thanks for the awesome plugin. I was actually demoing Softube Modular when i stumbled upon SoloRack and yeah, within the day I ended up buying SoloRack instead. To me it's just much more flexible and it also sounds better once you really start to tweak those knobs. The envelopes are snappier and the filters sound better too IMO. It really feels like my experiences with hardware Eurorack and everything behaves the way I'm expecting, while at the same time getting me way deep into those unexpected sonic terrains!

I'm also very happy with the recent update and the developers willingness to listen to and respond to this thread. With the new update and everything I've been reading here, I'm confident that more modules will appear and also that more users will appear. Maybe if SoloRack was on Plugin Boutique or something similar, that more people would find out about it?

Anyway, you've got a new and very happy costumer here

[S0lo]

@XGmode Thanks

Hey, I just wanna say thanks for the awesome plugin. I was actually demoing Softube Modular when i stumbled upon SoloRack and yeah, within the day I ended up buying SoloRack instead.

Thanks. I'm glad you like .

The envelopes are snappier and the filters sound better too IMO

hehe, funny you should mention, that envelope gave me some hard time to perfect. Choosing minimum attack times is a puzzle on it's own that I had to ask fellow wigglers to chip in their opinion.

It really feels like my experiences with hardware Eurorack and everything behaves the way I'm expecting, while at the same time getting me way deep into those unexpected sonic terrains!

Cool, BTW, heads up to the SA11 and SA12 modules if you like to connect SoloRack to Eurorack.

I'm also very happy with the recent update and the developers willingness to listen to and respond to this thread. With the new update and everything I've been reading here, I'm confident that more modules will appear and also that more users will appear

Yea, this update has been more of a fixing bugs and issues thing. Hopefully there are no more bugs so I would have more time for making more modules

[cerodios]

hehe, funny you should mention, that envelope gave me some hard time to perfect. Choosing minimum attack times is a puzzle on it's own that I had to ask fellow wigglers to chip in their opinion.

Yeah that was one of the first things i checked actually. The minimum attack time really seems to be something people are looking out for in synths. I guess in order to make those sweet transient percussive sounds sound just right.

By the way.. Are there any plans for a knob recording module - or alternatively a way to send midi CC to Solo Rack? It would be neat to somehow record knob movement of longer passes

I guess something like this one for an existing reference
http://www.schneidersladen.de/en/flame- ... order.html

[lalo]

I would like to tell you guys that Beta 2 has been released including two new utility modules. Details here: http://www.solostuff.net/2017/06/07/sol ... -released/

Here is the list of updates:

- New module, S705 Gate Length Processor
- New module, S704 Dual Gate to Trigger Converter
- Added "Tame + 1st" mode to the switch in S602 VC Delay. This will force the first reflection to always occur no matter what feedback you use.
- The sample and hold section in S516 can now be triggered by the internal random gate generator when there is no clock connected (Thanks to martin_l).
- Improved GUI performance.
- Added sluggish GUI workarrounds. "LEDs always ON" option and "CPU lite cables" option.
- Changed default location of data folder to "My Documets\SoloRack"
- Added Custom data folder feature using paths.ini file
- Fixed high CPU and high resonations while oversampling in S212 VCF.
- Fxied high CPU in S205 LPG
- Fixed bug in S500 ADSR working in exponential instead of liniear curve
- Less frequent demo mode noises.
- Added installer

That's great!
I noticed that automating ADSR parameters is pretty glitchy.
a.

[S0lo]

By the way.. Are there any plans for a knob recording module - or alternatively a way to send midi CC to Solo Rack? It would be neat to somehow record knob movement of longer passes

I guess something like this one for an existing reference
http://www.schneidersladen.de/en/flame- ... order.html

I think thats a good idea!!. I always wanted one of those recorders, Modcan has one too. I'll keep this in the requests list . The only problem would be how to manage memory as recording at audio rate for minutes would require some considerable ram. Lower resolution/bandwidth can save some memory though.

Regarding the MIDI CC, The SA03 module will send all MIDI messages it receives including CCs. It's the job of the receiving module to decode that MIDI into some sort of CV, similar to what you have in Eurorack. So the base functionality is there. Whats required is more advanced MIDI to CV modules. Possible in future