u-he

tribalogical · Post by **tribalogical** » Sat May 01, 2004 5:18 am

I just wanted to say, you couldn't have made a better choice for a patch-partner, Urs... biomechanikal? Yes!

His patch libraries for the Absynth helped that synth to really stand out. And now the Zebra too. Awesome!

well done....

does this mean you get to sleep a little soon?

peace,
tribalogical

Urs · Post by **Urs** » Sat May 01, 2004 9:47 am

Hiya Trib,

yeah, slept for almost 10 hours last night!

Just having my first coffee.

Biomechanoid is the dude, man. Unbelievable. The first 84 patches and his demo song came within the first 10 days when I got him Zebra 1.5 beta. Amazing!!!

Cheers,

Urs

Symbiant · Post by **Symbiant** » Sun May 02, 2004 12:30 pm

Thanks guys!!!

Working with Zebra must inspire creative insomnia

Anyway, I'm proud to be associated with such a wonderful beast of a synth and certainly had a lot of fun making the patches.

Cheers

[ Biomechanoid ]

aMUSEd · Post by **aMUSEd** » Sun May 02, 2004 12:51 pm

When is the windows version likely? - I am getting more and more jealous of our MAC using brethren, this looks even more awesome now it's gone modular (also do I get a reduction for persistance in begging

)

jens · Post by **jens** » Sun May 02, 2004 1:09 pm

clever marketing actually: because we can't have it
we only want it more

I want it

Urs · Post by **Urs** » Sun May 02, 2004 5:20 pm

Hehehe, Stefan Kuhn (Vivaldi, Ganymed) is doing the port. He currently implements some more needed features in his Jewel framework.

We'll soon transfer my old G4 over to him.

I have to clean up the code a bit and make a gui-less VSTi.

Will take some time... July/August is the target.

Cheers,

Urs

aMUSEd · Post by **aMUSEd** » Sun May 02, 2004 5:23 pm

Cool - great to see Stefan is involved.

jens · Post by **jens** » Sun May 02, 2004 7:56 pm

[drooling-mode]YES YES YES[/drooling mode]

Stalker · Post by **Stalker** » Tue May 04, 2004 12:47 pm

So will the development of a Win VSTi result in a Mac VSTi too? That would certainly be swell for us Tracktioneers. PLEASE!

stefankuhn · Post by **stefankuhn** » Tue May 04, 2004 1:01 pm

Stalker wrote:So will the development of a Win VSTi result in a Mac VSTi too? That would certainly be swell for us Tracktioneers. PLEASE!

EDIT: Doh, I misunderstood your question, pardon me.

Best,
Stefan

Urs · Post by **Urs** » Tue May 04, 2004 1:17 pm

Yeah,

but there's indeed no VST version for MacOS X. I'm thinking of doing one, but I also think that nowadays every host on MacOS X should support Audio Units. - I mean, it's not like it used to be in VST, all the code necessary to host Audio Units is already provided with the CoreAudio SDK...

Cheers,

Urs

vic_france · Post by **vic_france** » Tue May 04, 2004 2:32 pm

Hi Urs,
My vote too for a VST-OS X version! I'm using Cubase SX 2 most of the time nowadays, and I know for a fact I'd be using Zebra a load more if I didn't have to change hosts in order to do so.( I've tried using Rax via Jack, but it's a bit complicated when the only AU one needs in Cubase SX is *one* synth! (o.k., Apple's Matrix Verb would be nice too!)
I *have* had a play with Zebra v1.5, though, and it sure sounds great! (but I'd still like to be able to control LFO depth from aftertouch as well as via the modwheel:-). The matrix does allow LFO rate control via aftertouch, but not depth, and although it seems there are possibilities via the "Vibrato" parameter on the ocillators, I think I'm going to need to see that manual to see in what way "Vibrato" differs from "LFO" (surely, they are the same thing?)
Anyways, great set of presets!

(P.S. Hi, Stefan:-)

Urs · Post by **Urs** » Wed May 05, 2004 8:58 am

Hiya Vic,

the Vibrato control in the OSC section is just a fine grained link to LFO1+fade, just like the Filters (1+2) have the direct link to Envelope2.

Ok. You could do this via the modulation matrix, but that's quite some hassle. I'll try to make wheel and/or pressure available for the LFO depth. One issue with that would be PolyPressure when used with a global LFO. This will probably lead to some unpredictable results, or will only have effect on the LFO+fade modulator (which still is processed per voice)

However, I've done some big efforts to reduce cpu consumption especially in respect of the modulation engine. Maybe, if I only offer this option for LFO1, it might not screw up my efforts completely.

Cheers,

Urs

vic_france · Post by **vic_france** » Wed May 05, 2004 11:00 am

Urs wrote: I'll try to make wheel and/or pressure available for the LFO depth. One issue with that would be PolyPressure when used with a global LFO. This will probably lead to some unpredictable results, or will only have effect on the LFO+fade modulator (which still is processed per voice)

Yeah, me and my poypressure again!!

). Whatever compromises are necessary with global LFO are a worthwhile trade-off for per-note LFO with per-note LFO modulation.

...... it might not screw up my efforts completely.

My personal experience has been that it is only when someone screws it up for you, that you realise that you've even been making an effort in the first place!

)

(I notice that the VST-OS X comment was greeted with a resounding silence!!:-))

Urs · Post by **Urs** » Wed May 05, 2004 11:18 am

VST OS X...

yeah... I'm thinking about it.

Urs

u-he

KVR Audio

Zebra 1.5 preview presets... MASSIVE! :)