Does anyone NOT like Diva?

[Gonga]

It's not even close to a formal theory since it cannot make verifiable predictions - it's an hypothesis at best, and it appears to fail the principle of parsimony. Trying to come up with a Unified Field theory or unify relativity with quantum mechanics doesn't provide us with theories so much as metaphysical explanations so far.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about this - I'm just a lowly geologist

In another thread I admitted to being a math geek. Now I guess I have to admit to being a physics geek as well. Superstring Theory is absolutely a formal theory. It does make verifiable predictions like supersymmetry which is being worked on right now at CERN. And by the same token, it is falsifiable which is one of the key criteria of a scientific theory. More importantly, the math works. This isn't something a bunch of physicists came up with on a drunken bender. This was developed over years of work and it is derived from the math we know describes how the universe works. Math is the language of physics, and it is the math which leads us to superstring theory.

As far as parsimony, what could be simpler than string theory? It states that all subatomic particles are an expression of vibrating strings. There, it can be stated in one short sentence. How could it be any simpler than that?

Hehe...thanks! Fair enough, though falsifiability is required even for an hypothesis - theories must be much more robust. Formal theories must accommodate all known relevant facts (making formal theories the most factual things in science contrary to popular "belief") - none can falsify - and I'd like to know what verifiable observations strings allow us to predict that we couldn't otherwise already predict with simpler concepts (Occams Razor)? I realize this may simply be true but not easily answered in a Diva forum!

I think we're gonna need a Diva Physics thread!

[mcnoone]

It's not even close to a formal theory since it cannot make verifiable predictions - it's an hypothesis at best, and it appears to fail the principle of parsimony. Trying to come up with a Unified Field theory or unify relativity with quantum mechanics doesn't provide us with theories so much as metaphysical explanations so far.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about this - I'm just a lowly geologist

In another thread I admitted to being a math geek. Now I guess I have to admit to being a physics geek as well. Superstring Theory is absolutely a formal theory. It does make verifiable predictions like supersymmetry which is being worked on right now at CERN. And by the same token, it is falsifiable which is one of the key criteria of a scientific theory. More importantly, the math works. This isn't something a bunch of physicists came up with on a drunken bender. This was developed over years of work and it is derived from the math we know describes how the universe works. Math is the language of physics, and it is the math which leads us to superstring theory.

As far as parsimony, what could be simpler than string theory? It states that all subatomic particles are an expression of vibrating strings. There, it can be stated in one short sentence. How could it be any simpler than that?

Hehe...thanks! Fair enough, though falsifiability is required even for an hypothesis - theories must be much more robust. Formal theories must accommodate all known relevant facts (making formal theories the most factual things in science contrary to popular "belief") - none can falsify - and I'd like to know what verifiable observations strings allow us to predict that we couldn't otherwise already predict with simpler concepts (Occams Razor)? I realize this may simply be true but not easily answered in a Diva forum!

I think we're gonna need a Diva Physics thread!

String theory is a repeat of 3's Company, with pretty numbers.
It doesn't make any founded predictions on anything.
It only want's to, but has not done so at this time, due to limitations of energy needed for such experiments.
Physics is at a standstill.
It needs something other than smart people to work it out. It needs a genius, and those tend not to be of the extremely smart variety, but of the imaginative variety...or the bright idea variety.
There is no all knowing through scientific method anyway.
There's always more questions, and string theory doesn't answer any new ones, but is simply reaffirming old ones.
As Gonga stated.

And Supersymmetry is not even a proven theory in itself.
There is no experimental proof that the theory is correct.
Maths are good enough, but not perfect as Godel proved.
There needs to be experimental proof, that makes predictions.
Predictions of little strings, in however many dimensions needed.

I think more effort should be put into fractals, self similarity, and a universe of emergence, that is a hierarchy of growth and expansion.
Like galaxies are the atoms of some larger scale, and they have different reactive properties, because physical properties change over space-time.
It shows itself in time dilation, and velocity movement from larger to smaller bodies with mass.
Maybe an hpc topic is necessary for this, but another Diva thread would work too.

[johnnyvn]

I've come across several posts from people wanting to buy Diva but not having the funds...Urs, any chance of having a quick, KVR-this-thread-only sale for like a 24 hour period so a bunch of us could make the move? Some of us have some of your other great products (I've got Zebra)...and I'd love to buy Diva. How about a May 10, one-day-only rollback to the introductory price?

[mcnoone]

I've come across several posts from people wanting to buy Diva but not having the funds...Urs, any chance of having a quick, KVR-this-thread-only sale for like a 24 hour period so a bunch of us could make the move? Some of us have some of your other great products (I've got Zebra)...and I'd love to buy Diva. How about a May 10, one-day-only rollback to the introductory price?

It's been said before in other threads within the U-he forum.
There are no sales for U-he products for various reasons, but there was a promotional sale for the first month or so of beta time for Diva that you could have purchased then.
There is another way "possibly" though...not sure but...
Create an exceptional batch of presets for it for free, that make him say wow.
It's a possibility you could get rewarded for something like that.
...but can't be certain about it.

[Sound Mechanics]

I do like Diva although haven't bought it... yet. I think it's the best analog emulation so far. I still like using the Korg Legacy Collection and my favourite soft synth FM7 though, but it's just a matter of time and money at the moment.

Regarding the sound of Diva: again it's fantastic but I wanted to compare it to my DSI Mopho for bass, which is always a good test. Although having great bass sounds I must admit that I still favoured the Mopho over Diva. Something's going on in the hardware department that seems to add a little to the sound, but not sure what. Just to balance up my findings, I listened to some comparisons with a Minimoog on SoundCloud and they sounded identical!

[megapiano]

I think the majority of EDM producers will get wet ears when they hear Arksun's demos:

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 82#4912582

Damn! These demos show that Diva is like the bright sunshine on cobwebs and fog!

[megapiano]

Just for fun, a few trancy sounds

These two are really trancy
http://www.brontoscorpiomusic.com/sound ... rancer.mp3
www.brontoscorpiomusic.com/soundexamples/diva/sorry.mp3

These two are not so trancy:
http://www.brontoscorpiomusic.com/sound ... lstice.mp3
http://www.brontoscorpiomusic.com/sound ... finied.mp3

Cheers
Dennis

Again more sonic sunshine...are these made with the factory Diva presets or with some other Diva sound library?

[megapiano]

That is what it is. Carefully laid out nonlinear elements.

Very profound...I think I am starting to see the light...thanks for the insight. I appreciate the work that went into Diva.

[megapiano]

Well, sorry for the confusion, but by nonlinear elements I meant transistors and similar components that have a nonlinear transfer curve, and which reside in filters and amplifier stages. They distort the signal itself, not its timebase.

Yes, thanks for the clarification...there are a lot of different kinds of non-linear behavior in nature and in synths ...but certain sought-after priceless well-crafted circuits like the Neve you mentioned have non-linear devices in them that just create magic and you have worked hard to try and bottle it in Diva for all our benefit...thanks again!

[megapiano]

Diva is a near perfect achievement of something that I no longer find exciting.

This is exactly how I feel about Diva. Personally I'm much more excited about synths that differ from the concept of subtractive synthesis, even though they don't sound as "good" as Diva.

That's a valid point. I'm pretty sure we'll find other applications for the methods we used in Diva, in completely different types of synthesis. And of course a great filter is never sniffed at, not even in a whatever complex additive synth.

Excuse me for offering a personalized summary of the thread so far...but again more words of wisdom...the techniques u-he used for Diva in subtractive synthesis can find applications in other types of synthesis...I look forward to seeing what those new u-he applications will be. And the quality filters found in Diva are valuable by default in all kinds of synthesis.

[Urs]

Yep. Thanks mate

[Numanoid]

Does anyone have any other complaints?

Well, I think it is too expensive.

Lower the price to €49, and one could probably sell 4 times as many products, making just as much money, but making it accessible to a lot more people.

[Kaboom75]

U-he should put the price to £500 as it's giving us perfect emulations of the best synthesizers ever made saving us all over 10k in beer tokens. If you can afford the computer to run it, the money to buy it is nothing.

A minimoog that is mono & poly with reverb, chorus, delay analog FX that is imortality to some.

[Doug1978]

Does anyone have any other complaints?

Well, I think it is too expensive.

Lower the price to €49, and one could probably sell 4 times as many products, making just as much money, but making it accessible to a lot more people.

With regard to the flaw in this argument, Urs says it better than me.
Read here in this other recent DIVA thread (Urs' reply, 3rd from bottom of page):
http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=4904237

[Numanoid]

Does anyone have any other complaints?

Well, I think it is too expensive.

Lower the price to €49, and one could probably sell 4 times as many products, making just as much money, but making it accessible to a lot more people.

With regard to the flaw in this argument, Urs says it better than me.
Read here in this other recent DIVA thread (Urs' reply, 3rd from bottom of page):
http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=4904237

"I otoh can't afford to sell her cheaper. I'd need more sales to pay for employees, rent, advertisement, insurances and whatever else is needed to run u-he. Berlin is infamous for its "cheapness", but it ain't free either. More sales would be okay per se, but we've reached a state where the little we have in support is already at the cost of about 1 employee. But to afford yet another employee would require even more sales. It's frightening."

I fully understand that the producer must cover his costs, and also would like to make a good living out of his craft.

But my argument is that by selling a product at a lower price, you will sell more, thus making just as much money, but making the product accessible to more people.

Why are for instance so many synths over at Apples appstore priced so low in comparison with the Windows platform?