A new competitor to Uhe Diva has arived!!!

[Krakatau]

Hey! The only dinosaur in this context is Diva herself!

Or the first one to be genetically reborn by the Doctor Heckmannstein



P.S.

(just kidding, not trolling ... )

[Urs]

monark aside, imo an ideal software filter should never cut below 15k when fully open . i realize many analog synths did......but i hoped diva to be the spirit of analogue without the restrictions of it ;P

Thing is, a 24dB filter with cutoff at 20kHz will already have a slight attenuation at 15kHz. That's because the attenuation is 3 dB per pole = 12dB with 4 poles at the cutoff frequency. Thus the attenuation starts about an octave below that. It's natural behaviour.

[Gamma-UT]

monark aside, imo an ideal software filter should never cut below 15k when fully open . i realize many analog synths did......but i hoped diva to be the spirit of analogue without the restrictions of it ;P

In a few more years you won't be able to tell.

[Ingonator]

In Bass example first part sounds more open and I like it more, I've run into this quite a lot while A/B'ing them, probably because Monark's oscillators sound brighter to me
Here are an examples:
Monark first in both
Saw
http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/2/9/3 ... %20Saw.mp3
Square
http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/2/9/3 ... Square.mp3

Did someone ask for "muffle" feature ?

I just posted an A/B comparison of the patches i reprogrammed with Monark and the corresponding audio files from the real Minimoog Model D:

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 61#5323461


Ingo

[Kriminal]

SPAM

[chilly7]

That said, we'll sure have a look at Monark - seems to be a great achievement. But we'll also surely have a look at some other synths which might contribute a bit more to Diva than just another flavour of Mini

If it is not a sicret what "some other synths" did u mean?

[chilly7]

Or just lock it... There are a couple threads already in Instruments with similar comparisons

apart from the fact that there aren't. this last page is very useful. most of the monark vs diva debate has been based on subjective nonsense (and most monark bandwagon jumpers). here is hard facts. audio comparisons speak mroe than a million words. and i think it can help Urs improve his already great product. Monark studied Diva for over a year after all.
in this particular issue we are looiking at......a nice bright saw can be important(who doesn't love a nice sawtooth?). whether the muffled one in diva is caused by the oscillator or by the 24db filter cutting a bit too much even when opened (like i believe is the case)...it needs to be looked into imo.

If Diva is modeling the behavior of the Minimoog Urs is using as a reference, then why should it be changed to match Monark? Either it is accurately modeling the synth he aimed at or it isn't. If it is, leave it alone. If it isn't then more closely match the original Minimoog. Monark has nothing to do with it.

because two mini Moogs migh sound different.

[Ch00rD]

Maybe two 303s sound a bit different, too.

[ksandvik]

Or just lock it... There are a couple threads already in Instruments with similar comparisons

apart from the fact that there aren't. this last page is very useful. most of the monark vs diva debate has been based on subjective nonsense (and most monark bandwagon jumpers). here is hard facts. audio comparisons speak mroe than a million words. and i think it can help Urs improve his already great product. Monark studied Diva for over a year after all.
in this particular issue we are looiking at......a nice bright saw can be important(who doesn't love a nice sawtooth?). whether the muffled one in diva is caused by the oscillator or by the 24db filter cutting a bit too much even when opened (like i believe is the case)...it needs to be looked into imo.

If Diva is modeling the behavior of the Minimoog Urs is using as a reference, then why should it be changed to match Monark? Either it is accurately modeling the synth he aimed at or it isn't. If it is, leave it alone. If it isn't then more closely match the original Minimoog. Monark has nothing to do with it.

because two mini Moogs migh sound different.

So to be perfect according to you, someone has to sample each and every MiniMoog out there and build a database from all the filter characteristics based on aging of components, AC/DC levels and much more and then you could select one of let's say ten thousand presets?

Yes, it's a joke. I doubt anyone is serious about trying to sound like any specific MiniMoog. Personally I don't even care if a SW synth is 1:1 with a MiniMoog or a specific one. If it sounds good, it is good.

Maybe some people have too much time, or procrastinate going to the studio doing music?

[chilly7]

Or just lock it... There are a couple threads already in Instruments with similar comparisons

apart from the fact that there aren't. this last page is very useful. most of the monark vs diva debate has been based on subjective nonsense (and most monark bandwagon jumpers). here is hard facts. audio comparisons speak mroe than a million words. and i think it can help Urs improve his already great product. Monark studied Diva for over a year after all.
in this particular issue we are looiking at......a nice bright saw can be important(who doesn't love a nice sawtooth?). whether the muffled one in diva is caused by the oscillator or by the 24db filter cutting a bit too much even when opened (like i believe is the case)...it needs to be looked into imo.

If Diva is modeling the behavior of the Minimoog Urs is using as a reference, then why should it be changed to match Monark? Either it is accurately modeling the synth he aimed at or it isn't. If it is, leave it alone. If it isn't then more closely match the original Minimoog. Monark has nothing to do with it.

because two mini Moogs migh sound different.

So to be perfect according to you, someone has to sample each and every MiniMoog out there and build a database from all the filter characteristics based on aging of components, AC/DC levels and much more and then you could select one of let's say ten thousand presets?

Yes, it's a joke. I doubt anyone is serious about trying to sound like any specific MiniMoog. Personally I don't even care if a SW synth is 1:1 with a MiniMoog or a specific one. If it sounds good, it is good.

Maybe some people have too much time, or procrastinate going to the studio doing music?

i thinkit would be good idea to moodel some varietiobs of Mini Moog and Uhe can sell them as addons to Diva.
but what i would do if i ould be in charge of Uhe is:
i guess it is quite possible to achive all possible sounds of a particular guir let say mini Moog in this example.
What they need to do is as i know are two ways:
1) to model each component in mini Moog all different variention components
2) to model each component in mini Moog and be able to change them and tweak them

so we migh be able to do modification in a mini Moog on software level which will be ausetic to a real mini Moog.
(so lets sey i could change this transistor to that transistor and etc)

[olikana]

edit: old shit proved to be just a load of bollox

[fluxmind]

as far as oscillators are concerned, to me Monark's oscillators sound like it have more attack.
Here's an example: Diva plays first, then Monark, I used VCF Cascade 12db filter with rough mode engaged in diva, because it sounds the most bright of all filter types, and I hear more attack in Monark, also it sounds like sound is shorter, though both have sustain set to full.
I'm not dissing here anything, it's just an observation, Monark sounds really bad in poly mode for example (though it wasn't meant to be poly), but for bass it has an edge, as far as my preferences is concerned, thought it's definitely very tiny thing to notice and in most cases, probably in all "real world" cases is non-detectable at all, so I'm a freak and I like more Monark's moog oscillators for bass or maybe envelopes ? interesting question...
So I like both synths, but it probably would be better, if this thread would end up in an Instruments section, because it can cause some unnecessary bad feelings for some
Edit: Well I've just noticed insanaty of my oservations
1/16 note
http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/2/9/3 ... Monark.mp3

Short sound almost indistinguishable at 1/64 lenth
http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/2/9/3 ... rk%201.mp3

Edit: Definitely it gives me impression, as if it were shorter, more staccato-ish

[EvilDragon]

Yep, Monark definitely has that Minimoogish "spit" sound. Spits right in your face!

[chilly7]

[V0RT3X]

This thread sure went on and on