KVR Audio

electro · Post by **electro** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 4:21 pm

Synthmania is a useful reference for comparing patch sheets.

BDeep · Post by **BDeep** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 4:22 pm

Keef Baker wrote:
bld wrote:...to the question somewhere above: yes, we hear you
thanks for all suggestions and feedback. Have a nice 'tweakend'

Przemek/d16
For me, as always you guys have done a great job. I bought it without even demoing it as I've not been let down before.

Do you think you guys are going to do something about the envelope not triggering on consecutive notes without a gap?

As I said a while back:
It took me a while to figure that one out, but actually you can have the envelopes retrigger on every note. Next to the envelopes you'll find a bunch of LEDs under Reset, select "trig" instead of the default "gate" and you're good to go.

Ingonator · Post by **Ingonator** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 4:33 pm

himalaya wrote:
Ingonator wrote:
The slider for the Resonance in the Funky Bass preset is left empty so i had set i to zero.

It's set to maximum on the PDF graphic I'm looking at. See again:

This patch sheet and the Synthmania example do not match. It's not that important though as the sound can be emulated by listening to the Synthmania demo.

Hi,

the right patch sheet is not above the name of the patch but below!!

The picture you presented is from the "Gong" preset.

This should be the correct picture for the "Funky Bass" preset:

BTW also the other image does not look as bad as yours in my copy of the PDF file.
I got the PDf here. ftp://ftp.roland.co.uk/productsupport/S ... 101_OM.pdf

Ingo

hakey · Post by **hakey** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 4:43 pm

ENV1 wrote:

An extremely nice demo of the real 101 because it captures the analog 'rawness' of the real deal very well. The good filter stuff starts around 2:50, so keep at it.

Changing the filter mode from "NORMAL" to "SH101" (tiny buttons/leds at the LHS of the filter section) makes a huge difference for patches with high-res.

himalaya · Post by **himalaya** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 4:44 pm

You're right Ingo!

I need to get new glasses, it seems

metrosonic · Post by **metrosonic** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 4:50 pm

Ingonator wrote: I got the PDf here. ftp://ftp.roland.co.uk/productsupport/S ... 101_OM.pdf

Ingo

What a goldmine you've just put in front of us Ingo!

Happy days...

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

Ingonator · Post by **Ingonator** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 4:52 pm

metrosonic wrote:
Ingonator wrote: I got the PDf here. ftp://ftp.roland.co.uk/productsupport/S ... 101_OM.pdf

Ingo
What a goldmine you've just put in front of us Ingo!

Happy days...

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

TThanks. even better is that there are some fitting audio demos:
http://www.synthmania.com/sh-101.htm

Ingo

metrosonic · Post by **metrosonic** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 4:59 pm

Ingonator wrote:
metrosonic wrote:
Ingonator wrote: I got the PDf here. ftp://ftp.roland.co.uk/productsupport/S ... 101_OM.pdf

Ingo
What a goldmine you've just put in front of us Ingo!

Happy days...

JM
------------
https://soundcloud.com/leftside-wobble
TThanks. even better is that there are some fitting audio demos:
http://www.synthmania.com/sh-101.htm

Ingo

Familiar with the stuff at Synthmania but many of the PDF's on the Roland FTP appear to be far cleaners scans than I've encountered elsewhere.

Really great resource.

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

darsho · Post by **darsho** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 5:39 pm

Sound of the Lush 101 is great, a lot of presets seem very production-ready.
Not into buying any more Sofsynths atm, though.
regarding CPU use :
maybe they'll release an optimized version CPU wise with an update, like Urs did with Diva.

Oliver Chesler · Post by **Oliver Chesler** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 5:48 pm

Hi Everyone,

I created some audio of the presets I created on SoundCloud:
http://soundcloud.com/thingstocome/lush ... ded-oliver

pdxindy · Post by **pdxindy** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 5:56 pm

JimmiG wrote:
dexterbella wrote:To do this with Diva I would need 8 instances of the synth, half a dozen seperate arps/step sequencers and about the same number of additional fx and it would have taken about ten times longer to setup/route than the few minutes I spent tweaking LuSH. Would it sound better? Possibly. Would it have been as much fun to do? No. Would my CPU cope? Definitely not.

In short, two different synths doing different things. For me personally I'd take LuSH over Diva every time.
¨

The advantage of doing it the traditional way rather than the "two-finger song" way, is that once you've set it up, it's much easier to work with. You can have parts fade in and out, change effects (use third-party effects), swap out the synth in one of the tracks for a completely different one (or even send the MIDI to a hardware synth), set up different sends for different parts, slightly tweak the sequences as the song progresses etc.

I understand the "WOW-factor" of hitting a couple of notes and having a whole song come out, but personally, I prefer to build the song myself in the DAW. That's kind of the whole purpose of a sequencer/DAW. If I'm goiong to use the synth itself as the sequencer, mixer, master effects etc. I might as well skip the DAW and run it inside a simple VST host to save on CPU and RAM.

The other huge advantage of using separate instances is cause they can use multiple cores... I am quite liking the sound of Lush but there are some factory presets where I get crackles with 1 note on my 2.8ghz i7...

pdxindy · Post by **pdxindy** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 6:09 pm

ENV1 wrote:For those who wanted some sort of 'acoustical reference point':

An extremely nice demo of the real 101 because it captures the analog 'rawness' of the real deal very well. The good filter stuff starts around 2:50, so keep at it.

PS: High volume strongly recommended.

Does anyone have any single layer Lush presets that emulate some of these sounds? If Lush effectively emulates the SH-101, then it should only need one layer to come relatively close to the sound.

HcDoom · Post by **HcDoom** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 7:29 pm

Just tried this, great synth, but cpu is ridiculous. I have i7 2600 and it eats it like crazy. A chord on a simple pad 80% of a cpu LOL.

dexterbella · Post by **dexterbella** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 7:32 pm

[quote="JimmiG"
The advantage of doing it the traditional way rather than the "two-finger song" way, is that once you've set it up, it's much easier to work with. You can have parts fade in and out, change effects (use third-party effects), swap out the synth in one of the tracks for a completely different one (or even send the MIDI to a hardware synth), set up different sends for different parts, slightly tweak the sequences as the song progresses etc.

I understand the "WOW-factor" of hitting a couple of notes and having a whole song come out, but personally, I prefer to build the song myself in the DAW. [/quote]

For me it's not so much about WOW-factor as FUN-factor. LuSH has enough flexibility in it's architecture to allow automating fading in layers and so on but I'm not going to be using LuSH to replace Reaper any time soon. It just provides a fun, easy, intuitive interface to mess around with ideas in a different way to my usual workflow - often these things can lead to exploring artistic avenues that I might not otherwise have explored. It is a very long time since I had this much fun playing with a VA synth.

Kriminal · Post by **Kriminal** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 7:46 pm

Cyforce wrote:i think the D16 guys, are genius on DSP coding, so i'm very sure, they can and has created a highly accurate emulation of the Sh-101.

i think they didnt

LuSH-101