Ichiro Toda Updates Synth1 !!!!!1.12version!!!!!!!!!

[Krakatau]

This beautiful man has given us a free gift, and if he is going to spend another unpaid minute working on it, I don't think it should be on multi-timbral improvements....

good thing that you point this...

[skipscada]

a free gift

The best kind of gift. In fact the only kind of gift.

[solovox]

Absolutely true...although I wouldn't do a search for 'free gift' online...you'll find that there are very, very few totally free gifts like Synth 1.

[brok landers]

Multitimbrality is not "obsolete" by anything as nothing actually replaces it except multiple instances, which is far from ideal in many cases and plain idiotic in others. Calling multitimbrality "ancient" and "obsolete" is senseless. If you have any sensible point at all to make against multitimbrality in synths or samplers, make it known. (hint: voice and CPU/core utilization limitations are related solely to specific plugins or hosts)

If you have been around since the first implementation of MIDI, like I have, or read up on why multi-timbrality whas developed in the first place then you would know that it is IN FACT an obsolete idea. Every problem that multi-timbrality was meant to solve is absent in a VSTi environment.

i myself know midi from the time on it was invented. and even if you are right that you could achieve most of the multitimbrality features without actual multitimbrality, still, it's not obsolete by far. i've mentioned the two main reasins in a previous post. and by adding multitimbrality synth 1 wouldn't loose any of its points at all. peeps who wouldn't like to work multitimbral would be able to just work the way they did before, there would be no harm and no change.

some kids just don't get it ...

Ahum.... don't you know that on a forum (where you don't know who you are talking to, or about) this is a very stupid remark. Hint: I started playing synths when MIDI still had to be invented and I saw Wolfgang Duren live after the PPG Wave (not the software) was just released onto the market [/quote]
i might not be as old as you, but i bought my first synth 1980, and since then i did stick to be interrested in synths (with an intension that not too many have) up to now. trust me, i know the none-midi age as well as the midi age very good.
and, for the record, the kid comment wasn't meant too serious, i thought this was readable from that post ...

[Teksonik]

If you have been around since the first implementation of MIDI, like I have, or read up on why multi-timbrality whas developed in the first place then you would know that it is IN FACT an obsolete idea. Every problem that multi-timbrality was meant to solve is absent in a VSTi environment.

I haven't read back a few pages to see what started the multi-timbral debate but one of my joys is to layer 4 Synth 1's, select complimentary patches and just play away. If I could do that from within Synth1 and save the layers as a single patch that would be a wonderful thing. So if being able to layer several instances of Synth1 within itself is the current general definition of Multi-Timbral then it's far far away from being obsolete.

well... if you allow me, multitimbrality made sense at the moment an external sequencer was used as a composer tool and it exonerates you then, of the need to buy a new synth everytime you need to play different sounds simutaneously

so indeed yes, at the present timeyou just need to load different instances of the same instrument for the same result
with 000.00$ of additionnal charge !

and IMO layers, with or without different key and/or velocity range are supposed to be basically played by the same midi channel, a bit different and an obvious bargain as an additionnal feature for synth1

As far as i can see, on that sense no real need for a mutitimbral synth1 as most of the audioinstruments IMO

as crimsonwarlock did, i've seen also all the evolution of electronic instruments since decades, and the beginning of MIDI when in 1983, the DX7 came to the market

Well at the risk of giving away my age I've been around synths since before MIDI...................

Let us not confuse Multi Channel with Multi Timbral. Multi Timbral just means it's capable of making more than one sound at a time. Multi Channel means just that, it can respond on more than one midi channel at a time. I have no need for Multi Channels in Synth 1 but Multi Timbral would be a huge addition for the reasons I mentioned above. (Think Disco DSP's Discovery)

[Teksonik]

To elaborate, Discovery is Multi Timbral but not Multi channel......and the Sequential Prophet 600 was the first Midi instrument if I'm not mistaken.

[Teksonik]

I am a Synth1 disciple from way back...use it on absolutely every song...and use three of them in every live show I perform. It's hands down my MAIN synth.

I just wanted to chime in and say that Multi-Timbrality is indeed a waste of Toda-Sans time, IMO. If you want to layer, just layer multiple copies inside Live's Racks (if you use Live) or whatever DAW you are using. Or use Chainer and load up 100.

This beautiful man has given us a free gift, and if he is going to spend another unpaid minute working on it, I don't think it should be on multi-timbral improvements.

I actually agree with the suggestion to simplify the color selection! Other than that, if it ain't broke...

Rock On Synth1...

I disagree. The most logical direction for Synth 1 to grow is in complexity. The easiest way to do that would be to simply allow the engine to be duplicated within itself. The other alternative is to add more Osc's Filters, etc.......................which will take more work for "Toda-Sans" ?

Color selection? Odd priorities..........

[Teksonik]

Let me get one thing straight. No one has appreciated the gift of Synth 1 more than I have. As I've already said in this thread it remains one of the finest bits of code ever to grace the music software world. I'd love to see Ichiro stop development of Synth 1 and start Synth2 as a commercial venture. He deserves to be compensated.

[Teksonik]

I started playing synths when MIDI still had to be invented.

God we're old bastards.

[glokraw]

I started playing synths when MIDI still had to be invented.

God we're old bastards.

when will BrokSonic Sound Design LLC be open for oldskool soundsets?

[SciFiArtMan]

Well, I started playing synths before the "personal" synth was even invented! And I still don't have a solid grasp of ALL possible MIDI functions and features!

I don't have anything of substance to add to this wandering thread - I just didn't want to miss out on the measuring contest!

But whatever direction Mr. Toda decides to take Synth1, I hope the CPU use remains as low as possible - one of the great and remarkable features of this unique musical tool!

I look forward to his new layering features. And of course hope to see some of my feature addition requests implemented. So great to see this marvel get some new attention!!!

I wonder if it might be interesting to have a poll (or some sign of agreement amongst us all) for what features we here at KVR desire - with the understanding that the true direction of Mr. Toda's creation is soley at his whim!

(I'd still like to see a step-sequencer!)

SciFiArtMan

[crimsonwarlock]

Let us not confuse Multi Channel with Multi Timbral. Multi Timbral just means it's capable of making more than one sound at a time. Multi Channel means just that, it can respond on more than one midi channel at a time.

First of all, we are both saying the same thing

Second: in the 'old' synthesizer world what you call multi-channel was always called multi-timbral. My ESQ-1 was multi-timbral and the K1rII that I still have lying around is also multi-timbral. The multi-timbral concept serves several purposes:

1. Using one synthesizer as several, sending each 'part' it's own notes via it's own midi-channel. With VSTi synths this is clearly not usefull as it is much better to plug in each instance to do it's work. Back in the day we rather had eight separate synths to work with but that was to expensive to own, so we settled for one synth that could mimic eight. Voice stealing was a bitch though

2. Live playing of splits on your keyboard: most multi-timbral synths could split the keyboard into zones and assign 'parts' of the synth to the zones so you could play two or more parts on one synth. Again, this was just for economics and with VSTi plugins we have the luxury of assigning any synth to any part of our midi-keyboard.

3. Layering sounds: because a multi-timbral synth can play different sounds at one time you can use this for layering as well. In most synths this was combined with the splits setup of the keyboad by having the ability to have zones partly or completely overlap.

Layering sounds in a purely multi-timbral setup was cumbersome though (it works that way in a ESQ-1 for example). For each part you have to set up the midi channel and then assign that midi-channel in your keyboard zones setup. Because of this clutch the synth builders developed the concept of layering. Sometimes called layers or multis. This has nothing to do with keyboard zones but is simply about stacking sounds on top of each other. My K1rII has, in addition to being multi-timbral, the option to setup multis.

Now here is where the confusion starts. In later big synths, the so called workstations like the Korg Wavestation, this whole concept got blurred because of the power that those synths had: by that time a 'multi' was a complex combination of multi-timbral AND layering possibilities, in many cases augmented with keyboard-scaling functionality to do even more complex stuff (the power of keyboard scaling was first demonstrated with the DX7 btw).

So historically:

- Multi-timbral: one synth emulating several synths with their own midi-channel and sound
- Layering: Building complex sounds by stacking (multi-timbral) parts on top of each other
- Multis: a combination of multi-timbral and layering

End of the history lesson

Now back to Synth1: I really don't see any use for a multi-timbral setup in the scope of what I just described. THAT really IS an obsolete concept. However, as I stated before I DO see the power in having a few layers in Synth1. And Daichi has already, in the beginning of this topic, stated he is thinking about layers.


So LAYERS are already in the pipeline for Synth1

To round of this story, multis where specifically devised to cater for live performances and in the current world of plugins this is best handled by dedicated live-hosts. Look at such software and you see clearly a multis-implementation in all of them. In those cases the host-software IS the workstation. Again, not something you want inside one dedicated VSTi-synth. I have VAZ2010 and Virsyn Tera, both synths that are somewhat emulating the synth-workstation approach. But they are cumbersome and restricting when you try to use them that way as they don't have the flexibility of a dedicated host for that matter.

[Kriminal]

i'd like to see OnePingOnly go 'multi'

imagine that, 8 pings at once

[juffi]

Ah yes good old days when you had a workstation like Roland Xp-50 or Yamaha EX5. In case of Yamaha EX5 i like the sound very much, but the thing was like a bitch when you worked with that multimode

So nowadays we have huge luxury compaired to the "old workflow and possibilities".

Now i think synth1 would be great with 4-way layer like discovery. And step-sequencer

I think we dont need a poll.

[Teksonik]

My ESQ-1 was multi-timbral

I've got my ESQ-1 sitting right next to me. Please tell me how to play more than one patch at a time.

It's not the ability to make more than one sound it's the ability to make more than one sound at a time that defines Multi-Timbral now and when I first purchased my ESQ new. For the record I don't consider each individual Osc a separate sound. Anything with more than one Osc could then be technically called multi timbral. Synth 1 could then be considered Multi-Timbral already. Again Disco DSP's Discovery is a perfect example of what I consider Multi Timbral today. Four complete synth engines that each can do a whole patch each with it's own filters, effects etc. Wusikstation has just added this ability to internally layer the entire engine several times.

Anyway it's good to hear Ichiro is considering such layers in Synth 1. I've had lot's of joyful hours playing 4 S1's layered together in a Host. The ability to do that and save it as a Synth 1 patch would be very cool. Wherever he decides to take Synth1 I'll be along for the ride but I'd still love to see what Synth2 could be.