The long DIVA thread

[Ch00rD]

Happy Holidays + a great 2012

Diva 1.0 has arrived

Happy holidays and best wishes for 2012 to everyone! (with a Diva license in my pocket 2012 is off to a good start already )

[Viktor [TUC]]

She's arrived!!!

[Ho ho ho - voice on] And Merrrrrryy Christmassss to all!!!




[Ho ho ho - voice will stay on till next year]

[metrosonic]

I haven't tried WOK's MIDI plugins, they seem quite nifty but are unfortunately PC only. On the Mac side of things there's another secret weapon though: Numerology, the only piece of software I would consider to be a proper sequencer instead of a glorified piano roll editor (also available as AU and VST plugins for use within your host of choice). Excellent for step-sequencing and arpeggiating until the fat lady sings.

Tbh, I don't like distinguishing between arpeggiator vs. step sequencer, I consider them to be basic archetypes, whereas I prefer to use more complex hybrid modular sequencing thingies (for which I like Numerology, Max and the like).

My weapons of choice when it comes to step sequence/arpeggiation duties. Numerology is such a perfect partner to DIVA (there's already been a lengthy discussion on the Five12 boards singing DIVA's praises). And Max, especially in it's 'Max For Live' guise is such a powerful tool when combined with DIVA.

I personally think we need to stop looking at DAW's as sequencers but start thinking about them as modular hosting environments with all kinds of crazy routing opportunities between our sequences, instruments & effects. One of the things I like about working in a software environment is that it helps me view my tools in a holistic manner. Logic, Live, Cubase, Reaper; whatever your personal poison, each can be viewed as an instrument as much as a sequencing environment. An instrument that helps you join the dots across your personal toolbox.

JM
------------
http://soundcloud.com/leftside-wobble

[Echoes in the Attic]

Many people don't get the difference between an arp and a sequencer though...

I think you just might be insulting a few peoples intelligence here. I'm pretty certain that most of the people in this thread understand the difference between a sequencer and an arpeggiator. Just because certain people have a different view to your own doesn't mean they lack your insight.

And for what it's worth most decent arpeggiation tools allow you more freedom to modulate a variety of paramaters in the target synth. I'm not anti onboard arpeggiation per se but if it comes at the expense of multi-processor support I know which I'd prefer.

I didn't mean to imply that anyone I was responding to doesn't understand the difference. Sorry if it sounded that way. But you'd be surprised. On KVR it's very common for people to mix up the two. Maybe it's less common in an u-he thread full of analog synth purists, I'm not sure.

Tbh, I don't like distinguishing between arpeggiator vs. step sequencer, I consider them to be basic archetypes, whereas I prefer to use more complex hybrid modular sequencing thingies (for which I like Numerology, Max and the like).

Case in point. And this is a common thought. Despite how anyone likes to think of them however, there is a very important difference. Seqeucners do not arpeggiate. That is, even if a sequencer lets you transpose, you get the same sequencer but shifted up or down. You can not change the chord structure. An arpeggiator will split the chord you are playing into individual notes. No pitches are specified in the sequence, that is completely up to your playing. This is absolutely essential for improvising or playing over an existing melody or key.

Any way, I've yet to find an external arp that allows ties/glides so internal ones like Zebras are very welcome here.

[3ee]

DIVA 1.0 RELEASED!

Congrats U-HE TEAM, I applaud your efforts!

Now it's time to forget all about this for a couple of days...
..go and have fun!
(and that goes for the u-he community also!)

Merry Christmas!

[pdxindy]

The less clutter on a VSTInstrumet like DIVA the better. Since there are so many MIDI capable hosts and so many FX, its better if the developers spend all thier energy and resources nailing down core components like filters and oscillators. We already have the other parts.

Agreed, I would much prefer Diva to remain without an arpeggiator and other peripheral devices.
Filters and oscillators are of prime importance.

There are various things you can potentially do with a step sequencer built in that you cannot do with an external one... modulation for example... and of course the convenience of saving the sequencer settings with a particular preset.

[pdxindy]

Many people don't get the difference between an arp and a sequencer though...

I think you just might be insulting a few peoples intelligence here. I'm pretty certain that most of the people in this thread understand the difference between a sequencer and an arpeggiator. Just because certain people have a different view to your own doesn't mean they lack your insight.

And for what it's worth most decent arpeggiation tools allow you more freedom to modulate a variety of paramaters in the target synth. I'm not anti onboard arpeggiation per se but if it comes at the expense of multi-processor support I know which I'd prefer.

JM
------------
http://soundcloud.com/leftside-wobble

With that choice then yes, I would take the arp/step sequencer any day over multi-core...

And while some people do know the difference, many many do not as witnessed by the fact of ask for an arp in a thread and lots of people recommend step sequencers.

Oh, and on the Mac, there are not really any good arps available.

[pdxindy]

I agree with regards to a sequencer in a synth but I strongly disagree with regards to an arpeggiator.

I don't understand the need for a sequencer in a synth, in fact I think it's extrememly silly. You're stuck with that one sequence rather than being able to do the exact same thing in your host, yet with unlimited variations!

I might have said the same thing... until using the built-in step sequencer in Bazille

[pdxindy]

I haven't tried WOK's MIDI plugins, they seem quite nifty but are unfortunately PC only. On the Mac side of things there's another secret weapon though: Numerology, the only piece of software I would consider to be a proper sequencer instead of a glorified piano roll editor (also available as AU and VST plugins for use within your host of choice). Excellent for step-sequencing and arpeggiating until the fat lady sings.

Tbh, I don't like distinguishing between arpeggiator vs. step sequencer, I consider them to be basic archetypes, whereas I prefer to use more complex hybrid modular sequencing thingies (for which I like Numerology, Max and the like).

Numerology is quite an amazing step sequencing platform... however it totally sucks as an arpeggiator...

[penguinfromdeep]

Congrats for the final release! It's a monster .. A step forward in the plug-in world ..

[pdxindy]

I haven't tried WOK's MIDI plugins, they seem quite nifty but are unfortunately PC only. On the Mac side of things there's another secret weapon though: Numerology, the only piece of software I would consider to be a proper sequencer instead of a glorified piano roll editor (also available as AU and VST plugins for use within your host of choice). Excellent for step-sequencing and arpeggiating until the fat lady sings.

Tbh, I don't like distinguishing between arpeggiator vs. step sequencer, I consider them to be basic archetypes, whereas I prefer to use more complex hybrid modular sequencing thingies (for which I like Numerology, Max and the like).

My weapons of choice when it comes to step sequence/arpeggiation duties. Numerology is such a perfect partner to DIVA (there's already been a lengthy discussion on the Five12 boards singing DIVA's praises). And Max, especially in it's 'Max For Live' guise is such a powerful tool when combined with DIVA.

Some things cannot be done in the host. Take the Bazille step sequencer... it can do things internally you simply could not do externally.

[Echoes in the Attic]

I haven't tried WOK's MIDI plugins, they seem quite nifty but are unfortunately PC only. On the Mac side of things there's another secret weapon though: Numerology, the only piece of software I would consider to be a proper sequencer instead of a glorified piano roll editor (also available as AU and VST plugins for use within your host of choice). Excellent for step-sequencing and arpeggiating until the fat lady sings.

Tbh, I don't like distinguishing between arpeggiator vs. step sequencer, I consider them to be basic archetypes, whereas I prefer to use more complex hybrid modular sequencing thingies (for which I like Numerology, Max and the like).

My weapons of choice when it comes to step sequence/arpeggiation duties. Numerology is such a perfect partner to DIVA (there's already been a lengthy discussion on the Five12 boards singing DIVA's praises). And Max, especially in it's 'Max For Live' guise is such a powerful tool when combined with DIVA.

Some things cannot be done in the host. Take the Bazille step sequencer... it can do things internally you simply could not do externally.

I'd love to get to know it better. Unfortunately the VST gui is cutoff on the mac. Right in the moddle of the step sequencer! d'oh!

[Urs]

I'd love to get to know it better. Unfortunately the VST gui is cutoff on the mac. Right in the moddle of the step sequencer! d'oh!

Sorry bout that... try AU

[DrGonzo]

While a step-sequencer would be cool, it's not actually necessary to create one to achieve the same effect. A more advanced lfo-mode with the possibility to draw in the shape of the lfo, would be well enough. A good example of how this is done is with the Performance modulator in Massive.

/C

[ThomasHelzle]

Congratulations Urs, Clemens and Howard!

It's a great piece of work, too bad I have to pass on this one.

At least there are some of my presets in the Treasure Trove! Yay!

Cheers!!!

Tom