KVR Audio

ZenPunkHippy · Post by **ZenPunkHippy** » Mon Oct 22, 2012 12:21 am

himalaya wrote:Does Lush-101 sound like SH-101?

Excellent demo. No shortage of bass here!

FWIW I decided not to use the 2nd envelope trick so that the settings were matched as closely as possible, but I can see how that might show LuSH-101 to be lacking in some way. Hopefully you can find the time to do a more detailed comparison.

Peace,
Andy.

suntsu · Post by **suntsu** » Mon Oct 22, 2012 5:55 am

AUTO-ADMIN: Non-MP3, WAV, OGG, SoundCloud, YouTube, Vimeo, Twitter and Facebook links in this post have been protected automatically. Once the member reaches 5 posts the links will function as normal.

I made a quick review on my blog (PDF file) :

http://www.avalon-zone.be/blog/vsti-plu ... d16-group/ (http://www.avalon-zone.be/blog/vsti-plugins/lush-101-d16-group/)

Have a nice day !

electro · Post by **electro** » Mon Oct 22, 2012 8:33 am

himalaya wrote:Does Lush-101 sound like SH-101?

SH-101 vs. Lush-101

You hear Lush-101 and SH-101 side by side. I'm using the Synthmania Funky Bass file there (hope it's ok to paste it like that). I will be able to set Lush101 against a real SH-101 next week, time permitting. In the meantime...is this close enough?

They sound identical. Which plays first SH-101 file or Lush? Are they parameter matched?

Timfonie · Post by **Timfonie** » Mon Oct 22, 2012 9:09 am

electro wrote:
himalaya wrote:Does Lush-101 sound like SH-101?

SH-101 vs. Lush-101

You hear Lush-101 and SH-101 side by side. I'm using the Synthmania Funky Bass file there (hope it's ok to paste it like that). I will be able to set Lush101 against a real SH-101 next week, time permitting. In the meantime...is this close enough?
They sound identical. Which plays first SH-101 file or Lush? Are they parameter matched?

I'n wondering too. Perhaps Himalaya means litterally side by side, so one instrument on the left and the other on the right? In that case I'd guess Lush-101 is on the left side. Either way they sound very much the same. Well done.

himalaya · Post by **himalaya** » Mon Oct 22, 2012 9:20 am

Sorry chaps. There is a mistake. I have uploaded the wrong file in haste. This is the one:
http://www.electric-himalaya.com/stuff/ ... kyBass.mp3

electro, when you said that the files were identical alarm bells rung as they weren't idtentical...so I had to double check and it seems like I've grabbed the Lush-101 output render, rather than the Lush+SH rendered file. My apologies. The files are not identical, as can be heard in this current correct file. I really need new glasses after all.

electro · Post by **electro** » Mon Oct 22, 2012 9:59 am

The sound is not too far off. Is the Lush file the same as the Patch Sheet?

d16's other Roland emulation are good but not perfect. They all need some improving. The Golden standard for analog synth emulation is TAL-Uno-LX.

himalaya · Post by **himalaya** » Mon Oct 22, 2012 10:33 am

Is the Lush file the same as the Patch Sheet?

It's slightly modified. I started with the original patch sheet, but I had to finish it by using my ears. For example, in the patch sheet the PWM is assigned to the Envelope. In Lush it didn't give me the right sound, however when I assigned PWM to LFO instead, tweaked the rate (very slow) all of a sudden it got much closer. However, this is all relative to how well Synthmania managed to reproduce the PDF patch sheet. If Synthmania's sound is not a 1:1 reproduction (and it's not easy to reproduce sounds from patch sheets) then trying to get the same sound using the patch sheet would be futile (which it was). But then as Andy has already mentioned, there are differences when the two are matched 1:1.

This sound could be further improved, as for example my version has too much attack than the SH-101 sound (that's the second envelope at work here).

From experience I know that a tiny amount of filter 'drive' could help to get closer to such bass sounds. Obviously the drive effect needs to be good to begin with, and it not always is.

electro · Post by **electro** » Mon Oct 22, 2012 10:59 am

Patch memory is instrumental in emulating an Analog synth. Without, its much more difficult to isolate parameter values.

Crackbaby · Post by **Crackbaby** » Mon Oct 22, 2012 11:09 am

himalaya, could you do a filtersweep with full resonance using an envelope (fully open to closed)?

No pressure but it would be cool to hear!

Not sure if an oscillator should be present or not ... hmm

damoog · Post by **damoog** » Mon Oct 22, 2012 1:46 pm

TOTALLY BLOWN AWAY by this synth but its eating my cpu big time,its better than diva,its incredible,i mean wow,excellent work d16,release a patch to reduce cpu usage and im buying it

fluxmind · Post by **fluxmind** » Mon Oct 22, 2012 3:20 pm

ZenPunkHippy wrote: http://soundcloud.com/zenpunkhippy/d16- ... -vs-sh-101
Peace,
Andy.

Thanks for comparison!
Lush is spot on, if you disregard the fact that HW samples not just sound louder, they even look louder in waveform itself.
So lush is remarkably spot on and HW presence can't be taken seriously, since it's samples are louder.

Crackbaby · Post by **Crackbaby** » Mon Oct 22, 2012 3:28 pm

Flux, if you mean this particular setting then yes im obliged to agree with you.. but it's hardly a "tough" test, is it? A resonant filtersweep or some percussive sound to test the envelopes would say more.

That said, i really appreciate the sound examples provided!

penguinfromdeep · Post by **penguinfromdeep** » Mon Oct 22, 2012 3:39 pm

fluxmind wrote: Lush is spot on, if you disregard the fact that HW samples not just sound louder, they even look louder in waveform itself.
So lush is remarkably spot on and HW presence can't be taken seriously, since it's samples are louder.

While I agree that usually we perceive louder as being better, to me there's some more depth and 'presence' (unrelated to the loudness) in the hw samples, I think there's some saturation going on in the circuits etc .. That also makes the hw samples louder I think, because there's kind of compression going on with the saturation. Anyway regarding to the negativity in this thread; I don't see much negativity per se, just some differing opinions. for example I never said that Lush is bad synth, I just wanted it to go the 'extra mile' in the emulation department because it's already quite close at least in some sounds / patches..

Crackbaby · Post by **Crackbaby** » Mon Oct 22, 2012 3:54 pm

So.... i think it was Friday a guy from D16 responded said he had noted the opinions, wished us happy tweaking and ... here's where my memory fails.. did he write he was going to come back to this thread or .... should i look for it elsewhere? I'd love to see changes in price and gui size (in that order

)

damoog · Post by **damoog** » Mon Oct 22, 2012 3:59 pm

Crackbaby wrote:So.... i think it was Friday a guy from D16 responded said he had noted the opinions, wished us happy tweaking and ... here's where my memory fails.. did he write he was going to come back to this thread or .... should i look for it elsewhere? I'd love to see changes in price and gui size (in that order )

Yeah no indroductry price was a disappointment,I would have definitely purchased it if it had been a tad cheaper