The long DIVA thread

[himalaya]

The 800, 770, and the original mini700 on which those are based are just gorgeous sounding synths. I have my vintage synths in storage most of the time (lack of space at the moment) but my 700 is always on my desktop in easy reach of that filter. Such a simple synth, but so enjoyable to use.

[hakey]

I don't know how much architecture will be common between Tyrell and DIVA, but something I've noticed with Tyrell is that if I save a mono patch with stacked voices and 'Drift' turned off, the phase relationship between the voices will not be replicated each time the patch is selected anew. For some patches, particularly basses, this results in very noticeable variations in timbre for different instances of the same patch.

Perhaps it's beyond the scope of an analog modelled synth, but mightn't it be preferable for DIVA to have the ability to save the initial phase relationship between stacked voices as part of a patch?

[Urs]

Well, I havn't seen an analogue synth yet that preserves phase relations between voices.

We might add an oscillator model with phase reset though. Or we might add it to the Juno 60ish oscillator. Dunno...

[Crackbaby]

Every time i see there's a new message here i get my hopes up u-he will say it's ready for beta or something ......... gahh! By the way, thank you SO much for letting Zebralette go free, i like it a lot! I play around with zebra also but that one is way out of reach for my wallet. So i really appriciate that you let me play with those synths for free. Ace is still my no1 synth though and tyrell of course!

I like when softsynths has an x/y like zebra or 1-8 morph like NI's Kore and alchemy which has both. It lets you play around with complex patches without learning how it's built up. Will/can you make that for Diva? And force those who make patches for you to use them? :p
Take care U-he!!!

[hakey]

We might add an oscillator model with phase reset though. Or we might add it to the Juno 60ish oscillator. Dunno...

It would cetainly be useful.

[Urs]

Will/can you make that for Diva? And force those who make patches for you to use them? :p

Hmmm... not sure yet. But currently I'd rather say "no"... Diva is going to be very simple!

[himalaya]

Diva is going to be very simple!

That goes against the character of a typical diva. Most divas have outrageous demands, so I bet your Diva, Urs, will also soon start demanding. Stuff like " I need more oscillators!" or "Give me the creamiest filter sweeps" or "what do you mean I can't have oscillator drift!" etc, etc.
Divas, I tell you, you better be ready...
(I'll get my coat in a sec...)

[xh3rv]

Diva is going to be very simple!

In that case, allow me to suggest something complicated!

(Pretty random, complicated feature request post - if it's an annoyance, please pretend I'm possessed by a weird slimy portal to Gozeria in the refrigerator, like in Ghostbusters)

Premise: the 127 steps one can get on a generic MIDI hardware controller mapping are not nearly enough for complete tweaking nirvana, and perhaps this is even more true with more and more accurate modularity and modeling.

Ultimately there are plenty of work-arounds, like "shift-click with the mouse", but I keep having this feeling like there's an audio <=> physiological feedback to manipulating knobs with thumb & index finger that gets lost in translation.

I find myself doing strange and pretty clunky things to try and get *micro*-tuning from macro-assigned knobs. It's not great for a creative flow but I really believe it can lead discovering new sonic territory where small changes can affect timbre, or pulling off that last bit of tweaking and revision on a patch - not always, but often enough that I keep doing it.


Boring list of hacks:
** In Zebra, using an X control, to define a micro-tuning while using a Y control for macro-tuning. Or something along these lines.

** In ACE, using a +5v into an empty multiple - I recently have put the knobs of the 4 multiple gain knobs pre-mapped to Ableton rack macros in varying ranges, so assuming I haven't gotten to a point where I need to use the multiples for patch structure, I can get a pretty quick & dynamic control over micro-tuning range by chaining things up.

** As a last resort tweaking Ableton rack 'Map Mode' macro settings for min/max Live racks to progressively hone in on values that can't be reached other ways, or with Uhbiks or anything else that doesn't have a little bit of abstraction along these lines.

More problems (actually that should read "Solution"? )

Some kind of virtual 8-paramter set, like XYs, but with 2-virtual-parameter groups that simply represent a major.minor of a single actual parameter. And then something really fast for mapping and unmapping hard parameters - just some neurons (mis-?)firing here ...

alt-click on a knob/control to send to next open pair of virtual parameters, draw a number or colored box or something on the knob to indicate which virtual parameter pair is controlling it ...

alternately drag-and-drop 4 virtual knobs (located somewhere unobtrusive on the edge of the UI) onto the hard parameter knobs to assign without needing to use a modifier key (note to self: don't insert joke about one hand free at the computer, will regret it later)

A button to write the tweaked values onto the hard controls and clear assignments

maybe a slider to control the precision of the 'minor' knob - e.g. for a control with 0.00 - 100.00 full range, minor control can range from [-5.00 to +5.00] to [-0.50 to +0.50]

These assignments really wouldn't have to be saved with a patch, like XYs.

If this is a bit ranting and raving, please consider this approximation of what I probably look like ATM:

[xh3rv]

More problems (actually that should read "Solution"? )

Actually, the real solution is a hardware controller with 4 sets of 4 ascending, diminuating circular solids. The top does fine-tuning, the next does macro-tuning, a third is touch-sensitive quick mapping type stuff and the bottom does something else. So, like 4 of these:



If made to scale, one could literally patch a synth this way ->

[bmrzycki]

The soft synth Surge supported NRPN messages which are 14 bit leading to very smooth interpolations between automation, one of the very few I saw using them. Few controllers support sending NRPNs though - the only one I have is my BCR2000.

I've held off from pestering Urs with my midi dreams; maybe I'll have to do that again.

[ghettosynth]

...

[Sendy]

I don't know how much architecture will be common between Tyrell and DIVA, but something I've noticed with Tyrell is that if I save a mono patch with stacked voices and 'Drift' turned off, the phase relationship between the voices will not be replicated each time the patch is selected anew. For some patches, particularly basses, this results in very noticeable variations in timbre for different instances of the same patch.

Perhaps it's beyond the scope of an analog modelled synth, but mightn't it be preferable for DIVA to have the ability to save the initial phase relationship between stacked voices as part of a patch?

For what it's worth, I feel the same about this issue. I guess because I hardly ever touch analogues, if the resultant sound from a loaded patch is different from how it sounded when I saved it, it *feels* like a bug to me, though I respect the history it has as a 'feature'

That said, I've no idea how difficult or what other negative effects storing the phase of each oscillator in a patch would be.

[justin3am]

The soft synth Surge supported NRPN messages which are 14 bit leading to very smooth interpolations between automation, one of the very few I saw using them. Few controllers support sending NRPNs though - the only one I have is my BCR2000.

I've held off from pestering Urs with my midi dreams; maybe I'll have to do that again.

The problem with this is, none of the midi controllers which can send 14-bit control messages are using 16-bit DACs (2 extra bits are typically required to compensate for noise) for their faders/pots. Generally midi controllers are using 10-bit DACs (8 usable bits) even on pitch wheel, so while the device is spitting out 14-bit values, the resolution of the control is not fine enough to hit every value. Encoders however are a different story.

[bmrzycki]

The problem with this is, none of the midi controllers which can send 14-bit control messages are using 16-bit DACs (2 extra bits are typically required to compensate for noise) for their faders/pots. Generally midi controllers are using 10-bit DACs (8 usable bits) even on pitch wheel, so while the device is spitting out 14-bit values, the resolution of the control is not fine enough to hit every value. Encoders however are a different story.

I agree. 10 bits is considerably better than 7 though.

I have to say I really wish I had the time to connect a Monome Arc to an iPad and write the software to make that the 2 knob + touch ultimate ui interface. Oh to find the time...

[Howard]

"Sensible" performance control ranges are usually a lot narrower than from zero to infinity - you CAN get much finer resolution without any jiggery-pokery.

EDIT: I was thinking "Zebra" when I wrote that.