http://www.timewarp2600.com/twarpsamples.html
Hot or not? (I haven't yet listened to them myself...)
TimewARP 2600 audio samples
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 1609 posts since 13 Oct, 2003 from Oulu, Finland
-
- u-he
- 28062 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin
They are pretty impressive, to say the least.
Robert Rich's examples are indeed a timewarp back to analog age, while the direct comparisons make me drool quality-wise. I'd die to know how they did that. The digital artifacts are kept to a minimum, while the sonic character is preserved.
While I'm not a fan of emulations, this one looks like it might have the potential to trigger me.
Cheers,
Urs
Robert Rich's examples are indeed a timewarp back to analog age, while the direct comparisons make me drool quality-wise. I'd die to know how they did that. The digital artifacts are kept to a minimum, while the sonic character is preserved.
While I'm not a fan of emulations, this one looks like it might have the potential to trigger me.
Cheers,
Urs
-
- KVRian
- 1202 posts since 8 May, 2003 from Munich
I hope they keep working on the filter though, but maybe I'm spoiled 
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 1609 posts since 13 Oct, 2003 from Oulu, Finland
Now I finally got home from my Christmas visit to my parents'.
I listened to those samples and I have to say that having tested the Arturia's 2600, TimewARP 2600 seems to sound much better. I'm still waiting for the VSTi TimewARP so I can tweak the knobs myself and see if there were some tricks used to make the synths sound better than it actually is. I'm sceptic of these things, since Arturia seems fond of small amounts of chorus to smooth out the raw sound a bit...
(so maybe other's are as well?)
I really want to hear TimewARP's raw oscillators in action and do my own filter tweaking so I really hear how it mangles the sound.
But still: I have a positive feeling about this synth...
I listened to those samples and I have to say that having tested the Arturia's 2600, TimewARP 2600 seems to sound much better. I'm still waiting for the VSTi TimewARP so I can tweak the knobs myself and see if there were some tricks used to make the synths sound better than it actually is. I'm sceptic of these things, since Arturia seems fond of small amounts of chorus to smooth out the raw sound a bit...
(so maybe other's are as well?)I really want to hear TimewARP's raw oscillators in action and do my own filter tweaking so I really hear how it mangles the sound.
But still: I have a positive feeling about this synth...
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 1609 posts since 13 Oct, 2003 from Oulu, Finland
-
- KVRian
- 889 posts since 10 Jul, 2004
are the a/b sample clips supposed to sound identical? cos they don't....not even close. none of them.
the 2 pwm leads for example are worlds apart.
they sound like 2 different synths with same functionality.....which is pretty much the problem people pointed out with the arturia one.
timewarp developers at least had the courage to show some a/b comparisons.....so they do deserve al little less secepticism.but still....
the 2 pwm leads for example are worlds apart.
they sound like 2 different synths with same functionality.....which is pretty much the problem people pointed out with the arturia one.
timewarp developers at least had the courage to show some a/b comparisons.....so they do deserve al little less secepticism.but still....
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 1609 posts since 13 Oct, 2003 from Oulu, Finland
TimewARP still seems to have much more imperfect oscillators (in a good way) than Arturia's. Arturia's 2600 osc's sound just like any other regular VST's oscillators. In other words: TimewARP 2600 seems to have those nice and small nyances in it's oscillator's sound which only a few VSTi's have so far (the small inaccuracies that make it alive; "analog", if you will...)
Those tests on the TimewARP site were really extreme cases of emulation, so no wonder that they didn't sound identical
In those kind of scenarios VERY SMALL inaccuracies produce big differences. Everyone here knows how much the sound of the pulse waveform changes when you do even the slightest tweak to the pulsewidth. Same kind of scenario here, only mangled even more.
...or I could be just an optimist wanting to fool myself.
Those tests on the TimewARP site were really extreme cases of emulation, so no wonder that they didn't sound identical
In those kind of scenarios VERY SMALL inaccuracies produce big differences. Everyone here knows how much the sound of the pulse waveform changes when you do even the slightest tweak to the pulsewidth. Same kind of scenario here, only mangled even more....or I could be just an optimist wanting to fool myself.
-
- u-he
- 28062 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin
Well, I think the basic problem is, they are not played at the same note. The original PWM example seems like 1 octave below the TimewARP or so?_starcraft_ wrote:are the a/b sample clips supposed to sound identical? cos they don't....not even close. none of them.
the 2 pwm leads for example are worlds apart.
they sound like 2 different synths with same functionality.....which is pretty much the problem people pointed out with the arturia one.
I think this is a honest demo. The digital one shows some artifacts, but definately less than you would expect from a digital implementation.
Also, I think the TimewARP sounds a little more *direct* and crisper. Maybe this is owed to the original being recorded through some gear, probably being limited and hi-cut.
Cheers,
Urs-
- KVRian
- 649 posts since 30 Oct, 2004 from Brighton, UK
I think, Time warp most likely recorded those sample themselves with the same gear.
I think the virtual version samples sound very good.
If I was tp buy anotherAnalogue sounding synth I think this would be very near the top of my list.
I didn't get on with Arturia's version cos I don't like their bulky GUI's and I hate haven't to scroll down the page just to see the controls.
I think the virtual version samples sound very good.
If I was tp buy anotherAnalogue sounding synth I think this would be very near the top of my list.
I didn't get on with Arturia's version cos I don't like their bulky GUI's and I hate haven't to scroll down the page just to see the controls.
-
- KVRian
- 889 posts since 10 Jul, 2004
urs u r right there i believe ....but really its weird to see a/b comparison with different keys pressed.it kind of fails the purpose of a/b comparison in the first place.(especially when u have pitch modulated).
all of the a/b comparison on the timwewarp page are pitched differently.no doubt about that.
still i believe it dont explain all of the differences....the ring mod saw sweeps for example....theres a tone almost entirely missing there.
anyway it would all appear more clear if they actually played the same notes. why they didn't still escapes me.
all of the a/b comparison on the timwewarp page are pitched differently.no doubt about that.
still i believe it dont explain all of the differences....the ring mod saw sweeps for example....theres a tone almost entirely missing there.
anyway it would all appear more clear if they actually played the same notes. why they didn't still escapes me.
-
- u-he
- 28062 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin
I don't know. I'll ask them._starcraft_ wrote:anyway it would all appear more clear if they actually played the same notes. why they didn't still escapes me.
Cheers,
Urs