Is it really sick to have 20 synthesizers?

[vurt]

This thread has me trying more to discern who has missed their dose and who has doubled it.

I also count Reaktor as one synth-many-engines.
And to extrapolate that idea, my computer is "one workstation-many components". So technically, my regular setup is only five pieces of hardware with a bunch of software stuffed inside them. (But I have eight controllers.)

the whole room is just one big synthesizer!

[machinesworking]

Any chance you can share a patch or two? I bought Iris 2 when it was on sale recently but I've not had a chance to look at it yet. It's not something I'd have thought would be appreciated for it's filter so you have me intrigued. I also have no idea at all what you mean by "hard filtering" so it could help explain that, too.

So all that subtracting from the audio in the waveform window in Iris, well it's basically filtering. You're cutting whole sections, and the edge of the cut can act as a 'filter' sound. Obviously with regular filters you can't draw cuts, or cut just a ting noise in the 1100khz range, maybe with a lot of work. Hard filtering- no curve of 12 or 24 db etc. just a drop. I got a copy of Trackplug on some fire sale because it does this. Sometimes you don't want any rolloff. We can argue about whether it's a filter or not, but to me the basic function is the same, whether it's applied EQ style like we normally use or timeline dependent like in Iris.

All that said, one big disappointment to the Iris 2 was they still only have a main filter for all three samples in the Iris, and I'm struck by how useful it would be to have basic filters on each sample layer to help place the samples in a patch.

[machinesworking]

It’s not sick, but, being honest how many do you ‘delve’ into and how many do you actually know ‘inside out’.

I have the same problem, as some Synths I use for patch recall and they sound great as they are, but I really want to get to know them better and mae patches from scratch and the such.

Out of all the Vsti I own only a couple really get used fully the rest have great patches that I change a bit.

Having said that, NI NKS is really helping get a bit more hands on with my Vst that have NKS functionality and without that function even if it was a great Vsti I probably wouldn’t be interested, ergo from now on it has to have NKS functionality or I’m not interested really.

If you have GAS questions, check NI NKS keyboards as you might be surprized to see your current gear elevate a notch through the NKS system.

Honestly you're going down the path of more disappointment. Maybe take the time to learn one of your synths you currently own, spend a couple weeks on one? This is how you get your own sound.
Your "solution" is going to cause GAS, not eliminate it. Since you're relying on NI to label and tag presets to get a bass you want, when it doesn't come up with one you like, and the 8 parameters it lets you tweak aren't enough etc. you're buying the next 400 preset synth etc.
If you could actually program the synths you own, then you would know whether or not you actually had an area of weakness sound wise in your arsenal.

[cryophonik]

I currently have a room stuffed with 27 Access Virus TI2s and it's f'ing dope.

This thread has me trying more to discern who has missed their dose and who has doubled it.

Well, clearly the ones who missed their dose are now sick and, ergo, are the ones with more than 20 synths.

(incidentally, the emoji is called "cool", not "sick"...just sayin')

[vurt]

doesn't mean hes not sick.
even cool emojis get a sniffle occasionally.

[perfumer]

(incidentally, the emoji is called "cool", not "sick"...just sayin')

We should petition for a 'sick' emoji. Also, where is 'badass'?

[BBFG#]

This thread has me trying more to discern who has missed their dose and who has doubled it.

Well, clearly the ones who missed their dose are now sick and, ergo, are the ones with more than 20 synths.

Maybe, but both seem overly verbose and bound to each other's responses.

[BONES]

So all that subtracting from the audio in the waveform window in Iris, well it's basically filtering. You're cutting whole sections, and the edge of the cut can act as a 'filter' sound.

You can't modulate or automate that stuff, though, can you? It's more like a pre-process step. And given that you can draw your own shapes, you should be able to filter as gently as you like. But without the ability to modulate it, it's not really a synth filter, more a filter effect.

All that said, one big disappointment to the Iris 2 was they still only have a main filter for all three samples in the Iris, and I'm struck by how useful it would be to have basic filters on each sample layer to help place the samples in a patch.

Easily solved by running three instances, I'd have thought.

[dionenoid]

I'm pretty sick. Luckily it's not a STD.

[machinesworking]

Easily solved by running three instances, I'd have thought.

Sure, it's just a waste of resources etc. I'm not that much of a whiner when it comes to software I bought, it makes no sense to not know what you're purchasing, but I think one of the reasons Iris2 ended up being sold for $25-50 instead of the $150+ they wanted to begin with was this sort of omission.

It's still really useful though, it excels at creepy and outer space evoking noise.

[dune_rave]

having synths is not sick. not using them is sick

[BONES]

Sure, it's just a waste of resources etc. I'm not that much of a whiner when it comes to software I bought, it makes no sense to not know what you're purchasing, but I think one of the reasons Iris2 ended up being sold for $25-50 instead of the $150+ they wanted to begin with was this sort of omission.

What I've noticed with the synths I've doubled up on is that they don't double the CPU. e.g. If I get RePro-5 running pattern with long release, the CPU ramps up to 45% or more. If I add a second instance with the same patch and playing a similar pattern, it only goes up to 65%, which is about 5% more than if I combine all the notes into a single instance.

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

I'm pretty sick. Luckily it's not a STD.

Yup, those synthesist transmitted diseases are pretty resistant

[aciddose]

What I've noticed with the synths I've doubled up on is that they don't double the CPU. e.g. If I get RePro-5 running pattern with long release, the CPU ramps up to 45% or more. If I add a second instance with the same patch and playing a similar pattern, it only goes up to 65%, which is about 5% more than if I combine all the notes into a single instance.

The overhead of running a single instance is quite small. You have the idle overhead (same as when playing nothing, usually close to zero) and then additional overhead from running voices and such.

Honestly speaking in a well optimized piece of software or hardware there is very little overhead involved in running independent voices vs. centralized voices. Things scale almost in an entirely linear way. The overhead you see is actually most likely due to limits on how much data is shared... the extra 5% is likely due to redundancy that the system can't account for: the data might be in the cache already and identical, but the CPU has no way to know "data A" is the same as "data B" and in fact the software may suddenly make changes to "A" or "B" so the CPU would pay a huge penalty for mistakes in predictions like that. So the 5% hit is taken instead of a 300% hit for a misprediction about such, which tends to be over-all far more efficient in the long run especially when you consider a system running 100s of bits of software all at once.

[machinesworking]

Sure, it's just a waste of resources etc. I'm not that much of a whiner when it comes to software I bought, it makes no sense to not know what you're purchasing, but I think one of the reasons Iris2 ended up being sold for $25-50 instead of the $150+ they wanted to begin with was this sort of omission.

What I've noticed with the synths I've doubled up on is that they don't double the CPU. e.g. If I get RePro-5 running pattern with long release, the CPU ramps up to 45% or more. If I add a second instance with the same patch and playing a similar pattern, it only goes up to 65%, which is about 5% more than if I combine all the notes into a single instance.

This is the way that computers (DAWs) handle multiple instances in these days of multi core machines. The single instance is registering on one core of your multi core computer, the second instance is on another core. Almost every DAW I know of reads the cores ... uhm.. weirdly, i.e. it takes the highest core as the percentage, not the percentage of a combination of your cores. So a single instance of a plug in ramps to 45%, which if you have a four core machine isn't a real number, since it's 45% of one core. Take another instance and add it to the DAW and you get what seems like a marginal increase to 65%, but it's not, you're now using more than one core for that total. In the last configuration with a single instance you max out one core and get 70%, which is actually more efficient CPU wise.

Add to this the fact that you're never going to get a 398% efficiency level out of four cores, there's a trade off in my experience of about roughly 80-90% for multi core machines, so you could get your machine to perform at 320-360% CPU in Task Manager / Activity Monitor.

Basically DAW CPU monitors are not doing a great job at telling you how much CPU you have left, they tell you how close on one CPU you are to killing your audio buffer and getting crackles etc.

You can see this in action by running a basic to failure test of your computer and DAW. Repro 1 or 5 is a perfect plug in to use for this since they're pigs. Using a pig of a DAW like Live with Diva on my 7 year old four core MacBook Pro it hits 45% with one instance, 50% with two, rockets to almost 80% with four instances, and cannot load another instance of Diva after four without crackling the audio. I can load other lower CPU using VSTs after the four, but you can clearly see that another actual 45% loaded on a single CPU isn't possible.

I don't care much for anecdotes, so I spent a lot of time just actually doing tests, and this is all very testable. So don't take my word for it, test it yourself, it's not hard, and it dispels magical thinking.