TAL BassLine-101

[Ingonator]

How many people beyond some really talented sound designers like Howard and some others do use e.g. Zebra really beyond the usual subtractive synthesis?

How many people are really using the advanced features of Synthmaster like additive oscillators (for additive synthesis, not doing supersaws...), wavetable scanning, vector synthesis and 2d envelopes?

More than you would think....but if a simple Saw Osc and filter is enough to impress you then by all means keep using emulations of highly limited hardware from the 70's and 80's..........others are looking forward to the future of synthesis not to the past.......

I got enough "modern" synths at my disposal and just beta testing a new one...
Also enough complex polyphonic analog emulations.

Anyway for certain sounds like those from Minimoog i prefer using a dedicated emulation like Monark.


Ingo

[chk071]

As TAL is using zero delay feedback filters since U-NO-LX

AFAIK, he already used zero delay feedback filters for TAL-Noisemaker. I could be wrong though.

[Ingonator]

As TAL is using zero delay feedback filters since U-NO-LX

AFAIK, he already used zero delay feedback filters for TAL-Noisemaker. I could be wrong though.

I guess this was added as an update.

Here is a quote from the version history:

"Version History:

AudioUnit not showing up in logic fixed (version 3.22).
Hanging notes in some hosts fixed (working). (version 3.21).
New feedback delay free 24dB LP filter added. (version 3.21).
3 new filter types added (24db State Variable Filter, LP, BP, HP) (version 3.10)."


Ingo

[chk071]

I remember there was an update where new filter types were added. Could be that that had to do with it.

Edit: Yep, this should be it then:

New feedback delay free 24dB LP filter added. (version 3.21)

[fluffy_little_something]

How many people beyond some really talented sound designers like Howard and some others do use e.g. Zebra really beyond the usual subtractive synthesis?

How many people are really using the advanced features of Synthmaster like additive oscillators (for additive synthesis, not doing supersaws...), wavetable scanning, vector synthesis and 2d envelopes?

More than you would think....but if a simple Saw Osc and filter is enough to impress you then by all means keep using emulations of highly limited hardware from the 70's and 80's..........others are looking forward to the future of synthesis not to the past.......

I got enough "modern" synths at my disposal and just beta testing a new one...
Also enough complex polyphonic analog emulations.

Anyway for certain sounds like those from Minimoog i prefer using a dedicated emulation like Monark.


Ingo

Probably the Linplug one, eh?

[Ingonator]

Probably the Linplug one, eh?

Nope. Anyway it's still a secret...


Ingo

[fluffy_little_something]

I don't know who it was, but someone on KVR wrote that on the lower half of the keyboard and with modest filter resonance settings, 0df filters don't really improve the sound.

[EvilDragon]

0df improves resonance behaviour and filter behaviour with very fast modulations.

[fluffy_little_something]

Probably the Linplug one, eh?

Nope. Anyway it's still a secret...


Ingo

Yes, I know, it was more of a rhetorical question Just speculating here...
Knowing your weak spot for Tone2 it might also be a new Tone2 synth

[chk071]

Dunno much about the technical side, but TAL-U-NO-62 for example already has a pretty nice self oscillating filter, and that one is definitely not zero delay feedback.

0df improves resonance behaviour and filter behaviour with very fast modulations.

Alright, only just read that, so nevermind the above.

[fluffy_little_something]

Dunno much about the technical side, but TAL-U-NO-62 for example already has a pretty nice self oscillating filter, and that one is definitely not zero delay feedback.

Yes, with some of the entries to the contest some time ago one could hardly tell which of the two was used...

[Ingonator]

0df improves resonance behaviour and filter behaviour with very fast modulations.

Indeed.

Withou using resonace or fast modulations there should be no difference. In some cases you could also hear a difference when doing filter self-oscillation (which is of course a quite extreme setting).


Ingo

[fluffy_little_something]

In other words, if (like me) someone avoids filter resonance beyond, say, 50% of the scale (let alone self-oscillation) and modulation, it might even be better to use a conventional plugin as the sound is just about the same while CPU usage is much less, right?

[Lotuzia]

0df improves resonance behaviour and filter behaviour with very fast modulations.

Actually : It improves, or at least gives a different sound rendering, by mimicking the behaviour of real analog synthesizers especially with high to very hi resonnance settings, easy to notice during self oscillation stages, even with very slow modulations, like sweeps.

Btw speaking of the Jupiter 8, I made a recreation of the Jp8 factory library using Oxium, and did around 60 A/B compare clips to expose the results, so that everybody could have an idea of how a VA synth can compare to a real analog synth.

Here's the 1rst mp3 ( there are 3 others on our site, should someone be interested )

Jp8-Oxium Serie 1

______________-

Back to Sh-101 and sorry for OT.

[chk071]

In other words, if (like me) someone avoids filter resonance beyond, say, 50% of the scale (let alone self-oscillation) and modulation, it might even be better to use a conventional plugin as the sound is just about the same while CPU usage is much less, right?

It's always a cpu power/sound quality calculation, isn't it. Anyway, self-oscillating filters are very nice for filter sweeps, so for me, it's not a question of avoiding resonance above 50 %, rather what sounds nicer for what. I guess the amount of processing power for the filter is to neglect anyway, if you e.g. play pad sounds with long releases, the CPU power will mostly come from the amount of voices i think.