Arturia V Collection 6

[Franvu]

Seriously... Mac v PCs..?

C'mon people. Nobody cares what your personal preferences are...

Yeah, I honestly don't know how I let myself get dragged into this. It has nothing to do with the V6 Collection that I'm still on the fence about getting now or waiting until it drops to $99.

One thing I can't argue. The update is excellent. The new synths are super cool. There is no question I want them. The only question is whether or not I'm willing to spend $199 to get them.

I'm sure when the time comes I'll figure it out.

So for those of you who HAVE either gotten it or at least demo'd it, in what order would you rank the Easel, CMI and DX7 from best to worst? Just curious to see what the general consensus is.

I think (seriously) that you must update for $199, because I am sure that the next day you actualice, Arturia will lower the price to $99 and we can update the rest of us for a better price.

[Franvu]

I think everyone here should try Linux and Reaper.

I tried Linux three times, over the years, didn't like it, decided not to waste my time with it anymore. One of those times it basically destroyed itself and wouldn't boot, in a way I couldn't figure out how to recover from. It was basically "OS installation as a hobby" and I found I didn't enjoy the hobby.

I tried Reaper briefly recently too, on the theory that Maschine is a weird mismatch for the way I actually work and it might be nice to recover some desk space. I didn't give Reaper more than a couple of hours, but it was pretty bewildering to start out with and I didn't feel motivated to keep pushing through the pain until it got comfortable.

So anyway, how about that V Collection, eh?

I'm finding the Left Hand automation stuff in BEV useful in getting around some of the instrument's limitations. For instance, I can modulate gate 1 level with the "mod cv out" but then create an envelope to open Channel A volume.

Sometimes though, I'll have a nice patch set up, save it and... suddenly everything changes and the patch sucks. I suspect some of the less stable behavior just can't be relied on, like self-patching the inverter to make it oscillate. Which I guess is authentic behavior, but annoying.

Also the FX on the hidden panel often don't seem to complement the sound and I find myself using external FX instead.

As far as Aalto vs. BEV goes, I like them both for different reasons. Aalto is not very Buchla-like but has its own vibe. Its tuned delay line can create some really nice psuedo-natural wind instruments. In fact I keep coming back to growly, flute-like patches with it.

I have had installed Linux on my home system for more than 2 years and I will not go back. It is not easy and I am a computer engineer.

[ghettosynth]

I think everyone here should try Linux and Reaper.

I tried Linux three times, over the years, didn't like it, decided not to waste my time with it anymore.

Yeah, I use Linux every day. EVERY SINGLE DAY! It is my first choice for any kind of IT work and for some kinds of software development and the majority of my analysis work. I really like Linux, I know how to work with Linux, in some environments it has been my main desktop machine. I have done some audio development projects in Linux where it was the first choice owing to the embedded systems that we were using.

And I HATE Linux for music. OMG! What a total headache it is to get good tools and good hardware up and running. Linux is going to be on the music JV team for a LONG time.

[chk071]

I think everyone here should try Linux and Reaper.

I tried Linux three times, over the years, didn't like it, decided not to waste my time with it anymore. One of those times it basically destroyed itself and wouldn't boot, in a way I couldn't figure out how to recover from. It was basically "OS installation as a hobby" and I found I didn't enjoy the hobby.

That sounds exactly like my experiences with it. Never quite got the "gift horse" bonus TBH. On the several machines i installed and used it, it was never up to par with the "big" OS's in terms of stability, usability, and compatibility. But, hey, i really don't expect it too, considering it is made available free by small companies, or communities which work on it in the spare time. The thing is just that it's always "advertised" as being an alternative to the big ones, which it really isn't IMO. And, ultimately, i'm a computer user, not administrator, hence i stay away from Linux.

I was merely kidding though. I won't propose to use Linux, OR Reaper.

[Ingonator]

That's is also explained in this tutorial video by Glen Darcy from Arturia:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TyJPgXTLSQ

instructive...thank you,
As far as i can see it reflects quite well the good and the bads of what was the hi-end resynthesis capacities of the related decade !

Concerning resynthesis the "Time Synth" in CMI V is actually quite nice but it is also intereresting to program this from scratch while it could be quite complex with up to 32 envelopes related to the 32 harmonics/partials. So far i had only done quite basic stuff programming it from scratch using a frew harmonics and envelopes with only a few segments (you could have hundres of envelope segments).

Cool thing is that after you finished a sound with the time synth you could convert it back to a sample.

FWIW there is a video tutorial about that too (Part 3 of the tutorial series).

[Ingonator]

I searched how to import your own samples into CMI V and just found it.

I had linked my samples folder in the browser of Live 9 and am able to load samples by drag and drop from the Live 9 browser to one of the 10 sound slots in CMI V (not to the sample display).
You could then save the imported sample in the SOUND tab (with SAVE at the upper right) so it also appears in the samples browser of CMI V. Saving sounds from the Time Synth seems to work the same way.

Anyway the sample should not be longer than 30 seconds or you get an error message while this might also depends on the sample rate used for the sample. Most of my own samples use 44.1 kHz.

If you right-click on a sample in the CMI V browser you could delete it.

FWIW the factory samples are installed as WAV files. In Windows 10 64-bit those are found at:
C:\ProgramData\Arturia\CMI V\resources\Samples\Factory


UPDATE:
I saved a patch with one of my samples used and due to the patch size when exporting this the sample seems t be saved with the exported patch. Will try to check this further.

[Agitator]

Hm, no NKI support for the new synth at the moment!

This is very annoying!

[fmr]

Hm, no NKI support for the new synth at the moment!

This is very annoying!

It will come with the next update (so I was told).

[fmr]

You could then save the imported sample in the SOUND tab (with SAVE at the upper right) so it also appears in the samples browser of CMI V. Saving sounds from the Time Synth seems to work the same way.

Just a quick note to say that what is saved is not just the sample, but the entire voice structure (including effects in the mixer, modulation assignments, loop, keyboard mapping, etc.) as a Voice preset (VC). Good if we want to reuse it, OR JUST .

To load your own samples, besides drag and drop, you can also click on the little folder icons in each voice slot, which will open the traditional OS dialog box to look for and open files. Beware that, for the moment, CMI V will not read the sample header, therefore, it will load the sample with whatever sample resolution, bit rate and loop point is defined in the voice slot (the default is 33488 KHz and 8-bit, no loop).

And you can save entire maps too (for example if you create a drum map, and then want to exchange sounds). The entire map is saved, with all voice configurations. To save the Map, you have to select the TUNE/MAP tab. There, you have a large button at the right with the label MAP PRESET. If you click on the square underneath, you have the option to load or save a Map Preset.

[ghettosynth]

I think everyone here should try Linux and Reaper.

I tried Linux three times, over the years, didn't like it, decided not to waste my time with it anymore. One of those times it basically destroyed itself and wouldn't boot, in a way I couldn't figure out how to recover from. It was basically "OS installation as a hobby" and I found I didn't enjoy the hobby.

That sounds exactly like my experiences with it. Never quite got the "gift horse" bonus TBH. On the several machines i installed and used it, it was never up to par with the "big" OS's in terms of stability, usability, and compatibility. But, hey, i really don't expect it too, considering it is made available free by small companies, or communities which work on it in the spare time. The thing is just that it's always "advertised" as being an alternative to the big ones, which it really isn't IMO. And, ultimately, i'm a computer user, not administrator, hence i stay away from Linux.

I was merely kidding though. I won't propose to use Linux, OR Reaper.

It really depends on what you mean by stability though. My linux uptimes are often measured in years. Windows needs an almost daily reboot to avoid getting all constipated. OSX is somewhere in between the two.

As far as pure reliability and day to day stability goes for most normal desktop functions and pretty much all server functions, Linux is king. It's even fine with standard audio so long as you're not trying to do much routing or want to use a decent audio card.

I do think that the server versions of Windows feel more stable than the desktop versions and this is mostly down to what you can control and what is not installed.

I think that the mistake that most people make is that they think that it's something that you should "just try." Poppycock, don't listen to the linux nerds. If you don't have a legitimate use case for Linux, don't bother.

[chk071]

Windows needs an almost daily reboot to avoid getting all constipated.

Really? Windows 8 and and 10 do a hybrid shutdown, which doesn't shut down the whole system, but saves a big part of the system, so that it doesn't take so long to boot up the system. Can't see how that slows down anything. Or that i'd need to reboot the system at some point, even when i have the computer running for several days. Most Linux distros by default are pretty slim, with a lot less background tasks running, and a lot less software pre-installed. You can see that as either an advantage, or a disadvantage, because, when you do a lot of network stuff e.g., you'll have to install a lot of things, while it's likely to work in Windows out of the box.

Anyway, let's not direct this into a Linux vs. everything discussion. If you feel like it works for you, fair enough. It didn't for me really. And, the way i see it, a lot of the fuss about Linux is gift horse stuff, and open source religiousness.

[braj]

I just put Linux Lite on an old netbook, it is at least as easy as installing Windows, and can give new life to old hardware. I don't know what the hell to do with it now, but the main purpose was to wipe the hdd.

[ghettosynth]

Windows needs an almost daily reboot to avoid getting all constipated.

Really? Windows 8 and and 10 do a hybrid shutdown, which doesn't shut down the whole system, but saves a big part of the system, so that it doesn't take so long to boot up the system. Can't see how that slows down anything. Or that i'd need to reboot the system at some point, even when i have the computer running for several days.

Most Linux distros by default are pretty slim, with a lot less background tasks running, and a lot less software pre-installed. You can see that as either an advantage, or a disadvantage, because, when you do a lot of network stuff e.g., you'll have to install a lot of things, while it's likely to work in Windows out of the box.

It's not really a debate. There are many driver related functions that require Windows to be rebooted. My comment was meant to be taken with a humorous slant. The reality is that Windows requires a lot of active maintenance to keep it running smoothly.

Your perception of linux seems based on your limited experience with it. Again, I work with Linux daily. When used as a desktop machine, i.e., comparing apples to apples, Linux is far more reliable than Windows. Ubuntu desktop is anything but slim by any measure.

[chk071]

The reality is that Windows requires a lot of active maintenance to keep it running smoothly.

Like? If that was true, i'm sure i'd know about it. Having used exclusively Windows on my "productive" computers for the last 20 years.

Your perception of linux seems based on your limited experience with it. Again, I work with Linux daily.

Ah, k. Well, i used Linux daily as well, for 8 years or so. If your experience is really that the free distros we users use, like Ubuntu, Mint, OpenSUSE or Debian are as stable and bug free as Windows and MacOS, then, sorry, you're just completely deluded.

Server distros are another thing, because there's money involved, and the necessity of stability, and flawlessness.

[ghettosynth]

The reality is that Windows requires a lot of active maintenance to keep it running smoothly.

Like? If that was true, i'm sure i'd know about it. Having used exclusively Windows on my "productive" computers for the last 20 years.

Your perception of linux seems based on your limited experience with it. Again, I work with Linux daily.

Ah, k. Well, i used Linux daily as well, for 8 years or so. If your experience is really that the free distros we users use, like Ubuntu, Mint, OpenSUSE or Debian are as stable and bug free as Windows and MacOS, then, sorry, you're just completely deluded.

When you used it matters. Linux on the desktop was terrible for years. However, it's also possible that you simply don't know what you're doing. Like I said, MY linux uptimes are measured in years. If yours aren't, then you should upgrade your skillset.

Server distros are another thing, because there's money involved, and the necessity of stability, and flawlessness.

As I said earlier, it depends on what you mean by stability and how you measure that. Server distros are more stable because of how they tend to be managed, not because of anything intrinsic in the distro. It's trivial to install a server distro and add the desktop features.

I'm not going to start waving bona-fides around, but we started this conversation with you admitting that you gave up on it because it was unstable. That isn't my experience at all. Windows can't even do half of its updates without rebooting itself.