I think this synth has potential, however, I cannot use it because, although my computer is recent and quite powerful, when I play notes on my keyboard, there is a 2-3 second delay, the sound is crispy and my CPU meter is above 90%...I bought this computer recently and it works well with others plugins...
Although the presets are not very interesting to me, the functions allow you to make some interesting sounds that remind somehow the SH-101, especially with the distortion effect. But of course it's a little weak when you open the filter with the distorsion on, compared to an SH-101. Nice to take some time playing around with it though. It's a nice synth.
I have a PC with a quad core 3.2ghz, 12GB RAM and Windows 7. I also have a Mac Mini with a 2.7ghz quad core, 8GB RAM and Mac OS X Mountain Lion. I downloaded the demo of LuSH-101 for both and decided to give it a try. First on the Mac, I installed it and loaded up Logic Pro 9. I began recording random notes in monophonic, then try some of the polyphonic. Logic Pro began to start to lag, pop and crack and couldn't keep up with the instrument. I then loaded the demo into FL Studio using my 3.2ghz PC. I was able to add two independent LuSH-101 instruments and record polyphonic without any trouble whatsoever. Conclusion: Poor software design on the Mac, not by D16, but by Apple. Logic Pro doesn't appear to be very plug-in friendly and I suspect that the AU wrapper that has to be used could be part of the problem. Keep in mind Logic Pro 9 was loaded in 64-bit mode. Unless you have a high-end Mac or are happy with the limitations you have to impose on the instrument to make it work, you're not going to get much out of this instrument and Logic Pro in my opinion. I was excited about buying it, not for the PC, but for Logic Pro. Now that my hopes are dashed, my only choice is to use it with FL Studio or wait and hope that Logic Pro X will be way more efficient and plug-in friendly. The instrument itself is amazing and has everything you need at your fingertips to create great sounds. LuSH-101 is a winner, but on the Apple side at least, we have to wait for catch-up.
It makes me laugh all these people complaining about high CPU loads. To put this into perspective my desktop is a 2.8Ghz Core 2 Duo with 2Gb RAM running WinXP SP3. Pretty much at the lower end of D16's recommended spec. LuSH runs brilliantly on my machine. Here's why:
1) Firstly as a computing professional it amazes me just how many people have poor running machines. Too many unnecessary processes, devices, services etc etc If your music is important to you then configure your machine exclusively for music and don't install and run anything you don't need. Perform regular maintenance such as reg cleans, temp file removal, defrag etc you would be amazed what a difference these simple things make.
2) LuSH-101 is actually 8 synths, not 1. Too many people treat it as one single synth but this is not the case. Each layer is a polyphonic synth in its own right with unison, supersaws and effects. Look at it this way, take your favourite poly synth now and put 8 of them into your DAW. I'm pretty sure your CPU usage is going to be as high, if not higher than LuSH. Comparing it's CPU usage with other synths is unfair and invalid.
Well i second your statement in 1). A audio workstation is for audio only. Nothing else ... Even i run a intel 6 core CPU it allways amazed me to see that the CPU has a low load of 15 % whilst ASIO loads spike the 100 % and clip. These are things "too many people" can't change just with shutting down unnecessery processes and the things you stated. They need better soundcards respectively good ASIO Drivers ... Intel should have supported direct ASIO instead of video into their cpu's with direct RAM access.
2) 'bout the shioitor or LuSH: Same exp. with ASIO and CPU loads. I really wonder where that comes from.
I have spent some time with LuSH-101 and it does have a number of good presets. It does put a drain on the computer though. I'm surprised I have not seen this synth reviewed in a magazine (that I recall). I wonder how the magazines will like it.
LuSH-101 has presets that use multiple layers. Please keep in mind that any layer is in fact a complete synth on it's own. So when you are comparing a 3 layer LuSH preset to a (obviously 1 layer) Diva preset, you are comparing apples and oranges. It's not weird that LuSH uses more CPU in that scenario.
I made some nice sounding presets with both LuSH and DIVA and in my experience, the CPU load of LuSH is not higher than DIVA, when you make comparable sounds.
and yet it runs just fine and i have tested the entire preset bank, yes it uses an entire core, but of my 2.2 i7 laptop? that is way under their requirements and works absolutely fine here! so there to the reviewer hehe.
The modulation limitations on this is a complete joke.. Where ARE THEY? It's very very limited in that department.. sure i can program the top sounds in this synth but someone's AVIN A BARF here at D16.. sort it eh? A top synth let down by the lack of modulations routings.. i won't do a review on this yet cause i hear this is gonna be rectified however at this point in time i give it a 10/10 for sound and FX but a 1/10 for the modulations - joke!!.