Tone2 Saurus Teaser - Competition - KVR Giveaway

[zvenx]

kool..looking forward to it.
rsp

[Ingonator]

Those jabs at Urs are true Tone2 form. Yeah, Diva does use a lot of CPU cycles

The only comment about Diva CPU usage was from me; and it was not a "jab", just a comment since a lot of people started a comparison between the two synths. No meant to talk bad about Diva (in fact this never happened because that Diva is a CPU monster is known and clearly written on Urs site too).

I see it that way: Diva is still a bit ahead in terms of sounding more analog but it does it at the cost of high CPU usage. In terms of a sound quality vs CPU use ratio Saurus would win the competition.
As Saurus got a 24dB Moog LPF this seems to be the only one which could be directly compared to the corresponding filter model in Diva (or to a real Moog synth).

I'll try to do comparable sounds with Saurus, Diva and my Moog Slim Phatty soon and check the differences.

Anyway besides all comparisons Saurus seems to be a great synth on it's own and it complements well with other synths like e.g. Diva and Synthix.


Ingo

[GeorgK]

My two cents worth:
At first glance, it sounds very good. Not at least analog (as others had already pointed out), but very full and round, polished. But I am unsure if this sound originates from a special qualitiy in oscillators and filters, or if it is the result of some heavy "psychoacoustic" processing. Even with FX off, the sound appears processed to me.
In other words: At the moment I am not sure, if this is an "audiophile tube preamp" or just a "cheap HiFi with the loundness knob on".
I will give it a few more days of testing before I consider a buy. Especially as 99 Euros is really the upper limit for a 2-Osc synth.
E.g., I found DUNE great in the beginning, and now I do not use it anymore, because I find it so "pseudo". I do not want to repeat this experience.


Georg

[MaxSynths]

Anyway besides all comparisons Saurus seems to be a great synth on it's own and it complements well with other synths like e.g. Diva and Synthix.

Agree with you. Any comparison is interesting, obiouvsly.
BTW anyone should keep in mind that the term "analog" do not implies necessarily a strict comparison between the different synths... it's clear that any synth has it's own character (thanks God ), and I think the choice of the "right" synth it's very subjective and it's based on very different factors, tastes, etc.

This Diva vs Saurus "challenge" started for a stupid reason, but no one declared war against Urs or anything else LOL

Also not all are interested in a "pure" analog sound (I firmly believe that this is almost impossible to obtain, for example... but this is another story ), so my suggestion is to consider all the different features, play with the synth (preset sounds are good, but the real fun for an electronic musician start when you begin to program your own sounds too) and consider the pro and cons and if an instrument fit your needs.

Personally what I look in a synth is the audio/cpu ratio since I use a lot of instances in my projects and I can say both ElectraX and Saurus have an incredible low CPU usage if you consider what they can do. Also the modulation options are really useful and offer a lot of options to sculpt your sound. Also the filter section of Saurus (as has been already said) has a very unique sound IMO (I believe is one of the things that must be taken in high consideration).

Last thing: someone said that the sound it's the same of ElectraX. I think it's time to say an important thing: if you spend only 5 minutes or so with any synth they all sound the same. If you expect the new instrument to write some good music for you... well they will all sound the same then. And unless we are talking about experimental synths then there are not so many things that can be developed which can go beyond what we already know, a saw waveform it's a saw waveform, after all. But this is a very superficial way to judge things. I think the differences must be searched in the small details (and I'm not talking about Saurus here, it's something which applies to all new instruments and effects... and we know that are the *small* things that make the difference!).

I think the expectations can ruin a lot the ability to judge an instrument for what really is! (This is generically true for all things life, to be honest).

So reset your minds, play with the synth and evaluate it with a clear mind


Max

[4damind]

Diva is another story, IMO sounds completely different. More direct, more analog but uses a lot more CPU.
Maybe there is also some psychoacoustic processing involved like available in ElectraX.

Btw and OT... Very nice for Cubase users is the Retrologue synth!

[D N A]

I would say that comparing Saurus and Diva to each other is a little bit unfair.

Diva is 400-600 % more CPU demanding. Some basic Saurus preset uses like 5-6 % cpu, while some basic preset from Diva starts from like 30 % of cpu power (at least my cpu). How can you compare such two (clearly differently designed) synths ? Compared to Saurus, even ACE is cpu killer.

I would say that, when it comes to "sound quality / cpu hungry" ratio, Saurus is much better than Diva, but if your computer can handle multiple instances of Diva, if you're satisfied with it's cpu usage then it's fine - Diva will sound better and will not destroy your workflow.

I think that it's good to see another VA. Why ? Well, ACE is quite cpu demanding. Then Synthix - demanding too. Then Diva - waaaaaaay too demanding, even on totally basic preset. No, I don't have Intel Celeron 266mhz After all computer games, even latest, work great, DJing at 5ms is fine, IT programming with projects building - ok and other plugins too (ElectraX, FM8, Synthmaster, Sylenth, Massive, Truepianos, Z3ta+2, DCAM Synth squad cpu usage nicely scales etc.).

I actually like that somebody stopped this madness and instead of improving sound quality at the cost of killing most CPUs decided to pick another way -> OPTIMIZED it's software properly. I mean, sure some may like or not like Tone2 plugins, but I'm sure that their programmer is great when it comes to software optimization because all of their products use low amount of CPU. Yea, i'm IT programmer too (not related with sound, not C++ though, more corpo/banking crap - Java EE ).

[pdxindy]

I would say that comparing Saurus and Diva to each other is a little bit unfair.

Tone2 made the comparison in their own Saurus FAQ

[Ingonator]

I would say that comparing Saurus and Diva to each other is a little bit unfair.

Diva is 400-600 % more CPU demanding. Some basic Saurus preset uses like 5-6 % cpu, while some basic preset from Diva starts from like 30 % of cpu power (at least my cpu). How can you compare such two (clearly differently designed) synths ? Compared to Saurus, even ACE is cpu killer.

I would say that, when it comes to "sound quality / cpu hungry" ratio, Saurus is much better than Diva, but if your computer can handle multiple instances of Diva, if you're satisfied with it's cpu usage then it's fine - Diva will sound better and will not destroy your workflow.

I think that it's good to see another VA. Why ? Well, ACE is quite cpu demanding. Then Synthix - demanding too. Then Diva - waaaaaaay too demanding, even on totally basic preset.

Exactly my thoughts, also about the CPU use of different plugins. If your computer could handle plugins like e.g. Diva or Synthix those are great. Saurus on the other hand seems to be a very good mix of sound quality, features and CPU use.

BTW i have to check the Chorus FX in Saurus as i love the one included in Diva...


Here is some info about the "true Analog mmodelling" technology of saurus:
http://tone2.com/html/true_analog_model ... hnolo.html


Ingo

[MaxSynths]

I would say that comparing Saurus and Diva to each other is a little bit unfair.

Tone2 made the comparison in their own Saurus FAQ

Not true There is no direct reference to Diva at all, and I can't understand how this can be deduced. The FAQ simply says that the plugin is optimised for low CPU usage compared with other developers, and this is true. If the optimization of CPU usage is a feature must be clearly said, and it's also true that some developers do not care or have skills to achieve the same results (without pointing the finger against no one in particular). Can't understand this polemic.

[pdxindy]

I actually like that somebody stopped this madness and instead of improving sound quality at the cost of killing most CPUs decided to pick another way -> OPTIMIZED[/p] it's software properly.

It's good there are different options for different interests. I love the high cpu 'madness' cause it offers a level of sound quality that the low cpu synths don't have. Some people are happy to pay the high cpu price and others value low cpu more. That is why it is good that there are different options. Just cause you value certain choices does not mean that developers who are making high cpu synths are not 'properly' optimizing their synths.

[hakey]

I would say that comparing Saurus and Diva to each other is a little bit unfair.

Tone2 made the comparison in their own Saurus FAQ

Not only that: the sub text was "fancy 0-delay filters like Diva but with a minimal cost in cpu".

Seems like they invited a direct comparison.

[pdxindy]

I would say that comparing Saurus and Diva to each other is a little bit unfair.

Tone2 made the comparison in their own Saurus FAQ

Not true There is no direct reference to Diva at all, and I can't understand how this can be deduced. The FAQ simply says that the plugin is optimised for low CPU usage compared with other developers, and this is true. If the optimization of CPU usage is a feature must be clearly said, and it's also true that some developers do not care or have skills to achieve the same results (without pointing the finger against no one in particular). Can't understand this polemic.

Diva is not mentioned by name... but the comparison is there... it was obvious in the mention of zero delay filters, lots of people commented on it, and you need not try to deny the obvious when there is not a problem with the comparison

[filter303]

After some more testing with a fresh set of ears I have noticed many things I don't like in Saurus. I really wanted to like this synth 100%. But after some testing many weaknesses have popped out that ruin this from being an analog experience to me. All of them are related to the filter in some way:

I am an analog filter freak. Filters are what I love most about my analog synths. Sometimes I spend hours just listening to the filter sweeps I make with them. It might be that I don't make any melodies at all. I just listen to that beautiful resonance that each synthesizer might have. Hearing a nice filter is like music to me.

The filter resonance is where saurus fails most. It just doesn't sound natural at all. While the filter is different one from electraX (I A/B'd them), it still suffering URS (ugly resonance syndrome), the thing that plagues all tone2 synths. Many other softsynths have the same disease. I actually like the filter very much as long as the resonance don't go past the halfway. It can sound very liquid.

Filter drive is horrible horrible. It sounds so muddy that I can't stand it.
I have bunch of cheap guitar pedals that sound way better than this.
They are more noisy but the sound has character. Using the filter drive actually weakens the sound, which is not what I expect from analog overdrive.
Nice overdrive is what I really prefer for fat lead sounds. Hearing such an effect makes you always want to keep it on. This is not the case with saurus filter drive. I just want to keep it off. The filter drive also makes things quiet. If any resonance is being used it gets even more ugly really fast.
This is not the most important features for me since I usually like to put overdrive post filter instead of having it before the filter. So I can always add another plugin to have more harmonics. But it's more work and uses more CPU and it doesn't save with the patches.

Filter FM sounds very artificial. Especially if there is any resonance in the filter. It's also crackling if you sweep it fast. There is no way I could ever use the filter FM with resonance, it's simply just not good enough.
It does not sound analog at all.

Fourth and last weakness I have found is the filter feedback.
The best way of describing it is that it's simply useless. It does not sounds like analog feedback at all. High resonance itself sounds very bad but the feedback makes even the lower resonance sounds much worse that it was before.
Very harsh and ugly sound. I don't see myself ever using it.

After all the hype about this synth I am a bit dissapointed to say this but IMO Saurus does not fully deliver what it promises.
If you want to make the worse sounds you can with saurus, just make sure you use lots of filter drive, resonance, FM and feedback. It's going to get you there for sure. There is nothing analog about the sound if you use any of these features.

I own gladiator2 and electrax, so I guess I could say that I am a big fan of their synthesizers. Thus I somehow feel a bit bad that I only criticize their new product. I am sure tone2 has done their best with it. But the truth has to be told no matter if it stings a bit.
To balance the negative tone that I had when I expressed my feelings about the filter, I must also mention the things they did got with saurus:

- Like himalaya said, the LFO's are excellent. They go really fast and I like the way they shape things.

- Envelopes are good. It seems that they have just the kind of shape that I enjoy. Very well finetuned and sound very punchy.

- Oscillators sound good to my ears. It's nice to have PWM for all the waveforms too. PWM sounds very powerful IMO.

- OSC sync sounds very tasty. Many emulations fail here.
I can see myself using osc sync.

- Unison is so fat. Like I mentioned before it does not sound phasey at all.
Just the way I like it from my analog synths.

- Effects are really usable to me. I didn't feel like I needed an additional chorus or reverb with Saurus which is a very good sign.

- Filter is very liquid sounding if not too much resonance is being used (or FM, drive and feedback). I have very mixed feelings about the filter because of the things I have mentioned.

- Boost button.. I just got to love it
I am happy they kept it simple. Too many things to adjust would have ruined it for me.

- Presets are good for my tastes. I find plenty of stuff amongst them that inspire me to write songs. Lots of good starting points for my own patches also.

- UI looks and works well. It simply works for me.
This is important aspect of a product if user wants to make his own sounds.
Bad UI makes me use presets only. With saurus I can see myself making a lot of my own sounds


I haven't quite decided if I am going to buy this or not.
If I do however, it will surely be Diva before this one.

[zvenx]

I would say that comparing Saurus and Diva to each other is a little bit unfair.

Tone2 made the comparison in their own Saurus FAQ

Not true There is no direct reference to Diva at all, and I can't understand how this can be deduced. The FAQ simply says that the plugin is optimised for low CPU usage compared with other developers, and this is true. If the optimization of CPU usage is a feature must be clearly said, and it's also true that some developers do not care or have skills to achieve the same results (without pointing the finger against no one in particular). Can't understand this polemic.

Whilst I do agree there is no direct reference to Diva, but the deduction is based I beleive on this:

Q: Will Tone2 Saurus have those fancy 0-delay filters?

A: Yes. We completely redisigned the filters section and were able to create 6 filter types which support true analog modeling with a 0-delay algorithm, nonlinearity, feedback, self-osc, high-precision pitch tracking, low CPU, oversampling, very fast envelopes and aliasfree distortion.
It's a completely new approach to filter modeling which is not used by any other company or product so far. It's a different '0-delay modeling approach' than that one which has been discussed here on kvr a while ago. The main advantage is a much higher performance and a filter which is very precise with pitch tracking.

from this link

is referring to which approach recently discussed on kvr?

rsp

[Ingonator]

The discussion about Saurus and Diva was leading me into a Google search and this was the result:

http://www.divasaurus.com/




Ingo