Motorola DSP563xx Emulator (BETA) (Access Virus, Nord Lead, Waldorf MW...)

VST, AU, AAX, etc. plug-in Virtual Instruments discussion
KVRian
562 posts since 29 Jan, 2017

Post Fri Jul 16, 2021 11:33 am

Donated, thanks for your effort guys :tu:

KVRist
447 posts since 18 Nov, 2010

Post Fri Jul 16, 2021 4:03 pm

I'm not a coder, and very lazy. Does this work out of the ZIP or require more parts setup/added/installed/configured/ingested/downloaded ?

v1o
KVRAF
2814 posts since 2 Oct, 2004

Post Fri Jul 16, 2021 4:34 pm

Passing Bye wrote:
Fri Jul 16, 2021 10:36 am
v1o wrote:
Fri Jul 16, 2021 10:27 am
Is there any difference in sound between the A/B/C roms? The Virus B is usually said to sound the best out of the orignal line
https://gearspace.com/board/electronic- ... audio.html
That thread has various opinions but doesn't answer the question. Now that we have an emulator that can load ROMs from the different models we can finally do a fully controlled comparison.
Orion Platinum, Muzys 2

v1o
KVRAF
2814 posts since 2 Oct, 2004

Post Fri Jul 16, 2021 4:49 pm

chk071 wrote:
Wed Jul 14, 2021 3:01 am
v1o wrote:
Tue Jul 13, 2021 5:16 pm
chk071 wrote:
Tue Jul 13, 2021 2:11 pm
Pretty much sums up my thoughts about hardware. :tu: Great sound, but, those downsides...
Do you prefer the Virus to Spire?
Hard to say... this emulator is my first real contact with it, I only listened to a gazillion of sound demos before. Let's put it like this: Spire sounds more high end, and modern to me. And, I think I do prefer its sound. But, nonetheless I really like the Virus' sound, and also the *Nova's, and the old Waldrof synth's sound.

Spire is my absolute favorite in the synth's I tried hands on though, so, it'd be hard to push it off that spot. ;)
You're right Spire has more high end sheen. The Spire FX section was clearly Virus inspired. It's easy to over do the distortion in Spire, whereas the FX in Virus are limited to more musical ranges. I think the Virus sound is warmer and musical in a late 90's dance music kind of way. Spire is more modern and in your face.
Orion Platinum, Muzys 2

KVRAF
2558 posts since 5 Nov, 2014

Post Sat Jul 17, 2021 12:49 am

v1o wrote:
Fri Jul 16, 2021 4:34 pm
Passing Bye wrote:
Fri Jul 16, 2021 10:36 am
v1o wrote:
Fri Jul 16, 2021 10:27 am
Is there any difference in sound between the A/B/C roms? The Virus B is usually said to sound the best out of the orignal line
https://gearspace.com/board/electronic- ... audio.html
That thread has various opinions but doesn't answer the question. Now that we have an emulator that can load ROMs from the different models we can finally do a fully controlled comparison.
Guy posted same patch done on both and some people expanded on that, others continued justifying the myth and some hitting the straw man, if you just go what others are saying, than update the info, B doesn't sound better or different than C.

https://gearspace.com/board/showpost.ph ... stcount=13

KVRAF
28819 posts since 11 Apr, 2010 from Germany

Post Sat Jul 17, 2021 1:12 am

Yes, that's what I always read. The sound engine is exactly the same among all Virus'. The only difference people might have heard are differences in the DAC. Which, obviously, are not there when you use the emulator.
Plugins and a DAW. On an operating system. Which runs on a computer.

PAK
KVRian
1024 posts since 20 Feb, 2003

Post Sat Jul 17, 2021 2:13 am

The differences between A / B / C are down to the features. The A offers half the polyphony, less FX (especially no global reverb) no 3rd osc or LFO, smaller mod matrix etc. So it will sound more different. The good news about that is the Virus A should also use much less CPU in an emulator.. So if you've got crackles Virus A support would probably help.. :)

The C is very similar to the B, but added a per part EQ, which was immediately used to add more high end to sounds, or remove low end from some presets. Thus the likely source of comments that the Virus B "had a fuller sound".

The plugin version (TDM / Powercore) was basically a Virus B, but 16 notes and 4 part per core (instead of 24 note / 16 part of a Virus B) with some of the Virus C arp features. Its big advantage was it could load in preset midi files from the main interface, which effectively gave it unlimited preset storage. Also, if you wanted you could load instances into other cores, so EG a Powercore card's 4 cores would give you upto 64 note poly and 4 global reverb Virus B, with full automation offered for all 4 parts per instance.

BTW If an emulator ever offered full automation, of all 16 parts, it would result in something that would likely have around 5,000 automatable parameters for a Virus B(!)

KVRAF
2558 posts since 5 Nov, 2014

Post Sat Jul 17, 2021 3:31 am

chk071 wrote:
Sat Jul 17, 2021 1:12 am
Yes, that's what I always read. The sound engine is exactly the same among all Virus'. The only difference people might have heard are differences in the DAC. Which, obviously, are not there when you use the emulator.
DAC's are same too between B&C, as confirmed by Access, so it's just peoples bias.

KVRAF
28819 posts since 11 Apr, 2010 from Germany

Post Sat Jul 17, 2021 3:48 am

Interesting. :)

I think I might have confused something though. Might have been the Virus A people were talking about, because, it looks like that one has a different DAC than the others, according to this chart: https://synth.market/media/shop_items_d ... _Chart.pdf
Plugins and a DAW. On an operating system. Which runs on a computer.

KVRer
6 posts since 15 Jun, 2021

Post Sat Jul 17, 2021 4:40 am

Will the final emu support multiple outs?

KVRian
589 posts since 29 Nov, 2005

Post Sat Jul 17, 2021 4:51 am

PAK wrote:
Sat Jul 17, 2021 2:13 am
Also, if you wanted you could load instances into other cores, so EG a Powercore card's 4 cores would give you upto 64 note poly and 4 global reverb Virus B, with full automation offered for all 4 parts per instance.
Who stops at 4?
poco 2020.GIF
These are all poco Viruses - 384 note polyphony :D
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

PAK
KVRian
1024 posts since 20 Feb, 2003

Post Sat Jul 17, 2021 5:16 am

cleverr1 wrote:
Sat Jul 17, 2021 4:51 am
with full automation offered for all 4 parts per instance.
Who stops at 4?
Anyone who uses those since each core supports one 4 part instance:) I know you can load more instances based on the amount of cores you have. Though, if the card you licensed goes kaput, then the whole lot is gone.. Which is why it'd always have been nice to see a native plugin version..

KVRian
589 posts since 29 Nov, 2005

Post Sat Jul 17, 2021 5:59 am

PAK wrote:
Sat Jul 17, 2021 5:16 am
Though, if the card you licensed goes kaput, then the whole lot is gone.. Which is why it'd always have been nice to see a native plugin version..
Yup, that's why I ended up with so many cards. I had 2 unlimited poco installers and 4 cards, but then a fully loaded x8 appeared for a steal, hence the excess :) The emulator running Virus B using VirusHC as a controller is already every bit as usable as a poco once its set up.

To fully match the poco the emu needs a GUI that can load patches from sysex banks, separate outs and a means to input audio via a sidechain. It also needs a CPU with hefty single core performance.

With the speed the guys are working on this I don't think it'll be that far away.

KVRist

Topic Starter

74 posts since 17 Jan, 2021

Post Sat Jul 17, 2021 6:41 am

Piszpan wrote:
Sat Jul 17, 2021 4:40 am
Will the final emu support multiple outs?
VST3 will have six channels output / two channels input

User avatar
KVRian
562 posts since 20 Nov, 2000 from Valencia, Spain

Post Sat Jul 17, 2021 6:51 am

So finally the idea is releasing a different plugin (or edition) with its particular GUI and separate ID for each one of the synths that can be emulated?

Return to “Instruments”