KVR Audio

Acid Mitch · Post by **Acid Mitch** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:27 pm

Shy wrote:(redundant post, bah, don't use the Back button after posting). Anyway, since I got this error:
Acid Mitch: I wasn't joking, by the way, I'm really interested to know what's better about it.

It sounded like( ok, looked like) you were sarcastically saying the Pulse 2 couldn;t sound as good as the pulse 1 , which is what I found funny.
I agree a demo would be good though.

Ingonator · Post by **Ingonator** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:47 pm

Acid Mitch wrote: I agree a demo would be good though.

I just posted Pulse 2 examples with "basic" features at end of page 10 (previous page). I got no Pulse 1 so i could not compare directly.

As mentioned at the last page to me it also doesn't matter if it sounds 100% like a Pulse 1 as it is great as it is IMO.

Ingo

Acid Mitch · Post by **Acid Mitch** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:43 pm

I just noticed your demos after I posted. Not sure how I missed them ,lol.
The Pulkse's seem different enough to not be replacing each other.
Thanks for posting.
Here's some Pulse 1 action:

Ingonator · Post by **Ingonator** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:50 pm

In that video additional FXs (e.g. Delay) seem to be used which makes it difficult to hear the "raw" sound like in all of my my demos (around 69 now) so far.

At YouTube it seems to be diffilcult to find examples that are both raw sounds and also good quality.

Ingo

Acid Mitch · Post by **Acid Mitch** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:01 pm

Ingonator wrote:In that video additional FXs (e.g. Delay) seem to be used which makes it difficult to hear the "raw" sound like in all of my my demos (around 69 now) so far.

I agree, but I don't think the reverb is enough to really mask the Pulse's character.

hakey · Post by **hakey** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:02 pm

Acid Mitch · Post by **Acid Mitch** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:10 pm

There you go. One demo with effects and one with out.
Tells you pretty much everything you need to know, except maybe how tedious it is to program,lol.

Bronto Scorpio · Post by **Bronto Scorpio** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:16 pm

There are some good audio demos of the original Pulse at the bottom of this page. There is some delay on them but the basic character can be heard quite well.

Cheers
Dennis

Uncle E · Post by **Uncle E** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:21 pm

Ingonator wrote:2.) An Arp with modified Osc volumes, patch name "My Favourite":

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/532 ... edited.wav

That's my favorite, too.

I agree with Mitch, it doesn't sound like a replacement for the Pulse 1 and that's not a bad thing, it's just a different instrument. Thanks for posting these new examples, they sound great and help a lot!

hakey · Post by **hakey** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:28 pm

Uncle E wrote:I agree with Mitch, it doesn't sound like a replacement for the Pulse 1 and that's not a bad thing, it's just a different instrument.

It's bad news for anyone who was expecting the distinctive Pulse 1 sound.

bobborries · Post by **bobborries** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:49 pm

Why would you want it to sound like the old pulse? It used an inferior curtis chip for the filter, and the new one sounds much better!

hakey · Post by **hakey** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:17 pm

bobborries wrote:Why would you want it to sound like the old pulse?

Because I like the sound of the original. That and I reckon people will have been expecting the Pulse2 to be a Pulse1 with additional features - the shared name and Waldorf saying the Pulse2 would be backwards compatible suggested that to be the case.

It used an inferior curtis chip for the filter, and the new one sounds much better!

'inferior', 'better'? Because filter goodness can be objectively measured.

(I thought the filter for the Pulse1 was Waldorf's own design - sounded pretty damn good to me. Edit: yep, there's no curtis filter chip, inferior or otherwise, in the original.)

Uncle E · Post by **Uncle E** » Tue Sep 24, 2013 12:48 am

hakey wrote:Because I like the sound of the original. That and I reckon people will have been expecting the Pulse2 to be a Pulse1 with additional features - the shared name and Waldorf saying the Pulse2 would be backwards compatible suggested that to be the case.

Well, let's reserve judgment until the two can be evaluated side-by-side. Ingo, while a fine programmer himself, is certainly putting his own spin on these patches and there might not be such big differences once Pulse 1 patches have been imported into a Pulse 2.

riley4reason · Post by **riley4reason** » Tue Sep 24, 2013 12:59 am

Can it sync to a external midi clock? Arps and all? I ditched my Blofeld because it was always a little off and got worse as the tune went on.

Loved the sounds, but need god sync.

dayjob · Post by **dayjob** » Tue Sep 24, 2013 2:38 am

not sure how well it'll sell priced at the higher end of the market for this new crop of monosynths.

for $799 there are a lot of things w/better interfaces that fall right in there..

i used to have a pulse. bought new for $500 i think?? it was 1999 i think.. a nice synth. did the job. nice sparkling top end and a buttery bass. filter wasn't really full of character though.

i hope the pulse 2 helps w/the waldorf resurrection but w/the basstation2 at $499 (w/all those knobs and features) it's gonna be a tough sell. perhaps it's cheaper over in the EU???

anyway. .good luck w/it waldorf. i love my MW XT.

Waldorf Pulse 2: officially released (OS updated to v1.18)