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

[Shy]

What more should we say about it? I think the countless demos speak for it much better, anyway.

[Ingonator]

Hi,

just found a very nice and deep Bass sound in the factory sounds. It's called "Chorus Bss JD" and is done by Jürgen Driessen (who also made the first official Waldorf YouTube video):

Pulse 2 - Chorus Bass JD

Like always no external FXs added.


This patch uses no Drive. Osc 3 is routed to the Drive amount but the Drive is deactivated so it has no effect.
Osc 1 in this uses the APW ("alternating pulsewidth") waveform while Osc 2 uses a Triangle waveform. A small amount of Noise is added too. The filter used is the 12 dB LPF (not the 24 dB). Some velocity control for the Cutoff is added too.
When switching to the 24 dB LPF this sounds quite different which means most of the high frequencies disappear.


Ingo

[Uncle E]

To me that D**a comparison is pretty much pointless and nobody really needed that here.
I got that softsynth too but nobody could force me to post a comparison with it.

Has DIVA become a bad word all of a sudden? Sorry, I thought I was at KVR.

Anyway, it's no problem, I'm more interested in Pulse 2 talk and am looking forward to us doing our Pulse 1 and Pulse 2 comparison.

Even a comparison with the Sub Phatty is pretty much pointless IMO as the features are quite different.

What is so different about the features? Aside from the Paraphony, I thought they were pretty similar, at least as far as sound production goes.

[EvilDragon]

Well the filter design is MUCH different first and foremost (way more versatile on Pulse 2, being a multimode design), the number of oscillators and available waveforms (sub oscillator is not a real independent oscillator), then Pulse has a flexible modulation matrix (and one LFO more than SP - AND, envelopes are LOOPABLE), and way more patch memory. Then, Pulse has Arpeggiator (sends over CV, too) which Sub Phatty doesn't. Enough of a difference in features, and they're obviously tipping over to Pulse's side.

[dayjob]

Well the filter design is MUCH different first and foremost (way more versatile on Pulse 2, being a multimode design), the number of oscillators and available waveforms (sub oscillator is not a real independent oscillator), then Pulse has a flexible modulation matrix (and one LFO more than SP - AND, envelopes are LOOPABLE), and way more patch memory. Then, Pulse has Arpeggiator (sends over CV, too) which Sub Phatty doesn't. Enough of a difference in features, and they're obviously tipping over to Pulse's side.

yeah.. and i can't imagine they'll have a similar tone. so different.

they did take some ideas from the blofeld and apply them to the architecture of the pulse2. kudos to waldorf.

[Ingonator]

To me that D**a comparison is pretty much pointless and nobody really needed that here.
I got that softsynth too but nobody could force me to post a comparison with it.

Has DIVA become a bad word all of a sudden? Sorry, I thought I was at KVR.

Anyway, it's no problem, I'm more interested in Pulse 2 talk and am looking forward to us doing our Pulse 1 and Pulse 2 comparison.

Personally i have nothing against Diva (i got a NFR license for having done lots of factory sounds during the public beta and i am waiting for the update too) but this kind of dicussion simply does not belong to the hardware forum, at least not to this thread.
Of course you are free to start your own thread and discuss "Pulse 2 vs synth X" (where "synth x" could be softsynths too) if you like. Just don't expect me to do any softsynths vs Pulse 2 comparisons.


I loved Waldorf synths since before i had used any softsynhs and this has not changed until now. I admit that i am what some people call a "fanboy".
If currently i had to choose 2 synths to keep from my current gear (soft- and hardware) it would be the Blofeld and the Pulse 2.


Ingo

[faun2500]

Also if based on the audio demos you think it sounds bad your ears must be broken...

Tempted to say that anyone who thinks the following clips sound good has broken ears, but that might just be down to my refined tastes or something.

https://soundcloud.com/gryke/waldorf-pulse-2-extra-bits

https://soundcloud.com/gryke/waldorf-pulse-2

Just keep poking, It will get you no where.

[Ingonator]

Hi,

just found a very nice and deep Bass sound in the factory sounds. It's called "Chorus Bss JD" and is done by Jürgen Driessen (who also made the first official Waldorf YouTube video):

Pulse 2 - Chorus Bass JD

Like always no external FXs added.


This patch uses no Drive. Osc 3 is routed to the Drive amount but the Drive is deactivated so it has no effect.
Osc 1 in this uses the APW ("advanced pulsewidth") waveform while Osc 2 uses a Triangle waveform. A small amount of Noise is added too. The filter used is the 12 dB LPF (not the 24 dB). Some velocity control for the Cutoff is added too.
When switching to the 24 dB LPF this sounds quite different which means most of the high frequencies disappear.

Having mentioned Osc 3 routing here that one is located in the Osc section where the Pulsewidth parameter is found for Osc1 and Osc2.

Here is the part of the manual about Osc3 routing:

Sets the routing behaviour of OSC 3:
• Mix is the default setting and sends the signal together with OSC 1 and OSC 2 to the regular oscillator mixer and further to the VCF and VCA.

• Level 2 adds the signal of OSC 3 to the control voltage of the OSC level. Hereby, OSC 3 controls the amplitude of OSC 2, the OSC 3 level controls the modulation amount.

• VCF adds the signal of OSC 3 to the control voltage of the VCF. This enables a frequency modulation of the filter by OSC 3, which level controls the
modulation amount.

• Drive sends the signal from OSC 3 as modulation signal into the drive circuitry to modulate the drive intensity.


Ingo

[faun2500]

Korg Volcas?

The Volca Keys makes a lot of not-so-great sounds but the best sounds I've heard from it are better than what I've heard from the Pulse 2. The sounds I've heard from the Volca Bass have been consistently good but none of them are as good as the best sounds I've heard from the Pulse 2. That's all IMHO, of course.

I like the sound of the filters with the res up. The price too!

[faun2500]

A big + for the Pulse 2 is that it's a desktop synth and has no keyboard, at least for me. I don't understand why almost all synths still have keyboards these days, doesn't everyone already have at least one master keyboard?

I know I'm quite alone with this opinion but I also much prefer the interface of the Pulse to "one knob per function" designs. Why? There is not much in the world that annoys me as much as parameter jumps when recalling presets etc.
I actually like the layout a lot! Six knobs are enough for me as I don't think I'll ever tweak more than two knobs at a time and the parameters seem to be grouped really well.

Cheers
Dennis

I have the same opinion. One master keyboard and desktop/synths is good for me due to limited space. Also like the way these synths have only a few knobs but are easy to program. The slim phatty is really quick to use and only has 4 main knobs.

[faun2500]

Take my example: I'm surrounded by hardware synths in my room,

Good if you have the room!

[Ingonator]

Well the filter design is MUCH different first and foremost (way more versatile on Pulse 2, being a multimode design), the number of oscillators and available waveforms (sub oscillator is not a real independent oscillator), then Pulse has a flexible modulation matrix (and one LFO more than SP - AND, envelopes are LOOPABLE), and way more patch memory. Then, Pulse has Arpeggiator (sends over CV, too) which Sub Phatty doesn't. Enough of a difference in features, and they're obviously tipping over to Pulse's side.

That sums it up quite nicely. Not to forget paraphonic and unison modes. The Pulse 2 also offers dedicated PWM with different modes ("normal" and APWM).
Besides that the Arpeggiator has some advanced features. For each of the 16 possible steps you could add attributes like e.g. glide. It's also possible to assign a controller for adding accent (e.g. aftertouch).
That leads me to an important point: The Sub Phatty has no aftertouch. I already missed that with my Moog Slim Phatty (while they at least added velocity control to the latest OS). Aftertouch is very important for me, especially for adding vibrato with Lead sounds but you could do several other nice things with it.

For the LFOs besides the "standard" waveforms LFO1 also has 5 "clocked" waveforms that could sync to an internal or external clock.

One feature which i also like in the Pulse 2 is that you could switck keytracking for Osc 1 and/or Osc 2 on/off. This allows to create Drone like sounds (two examples in my own patches/demos).

Opposing to many other monosynths the Pulse 2 (like the Pulse 1) has a stereo engine that also allows panning modulation (shown in a few audio demos).

Opposing to the Slim Phatty the Sub Phatty (which had LED rings and a deisplay with the current value) also has no recall of parameters which makes editing existing patches difficult. Pulse 2 offer both endless encoders and display of the value.
You could also get the value of a certain parameter (without changing it) by holding the SHIFT button and moving the knob for the desired parameter.

Besides that the Pulse 2 could save names and categories for each patch. It is possible to search by category by using SHIFT and the patch selection encoder (the main encoder) and then you could browse only trough patches of that category.

The Utility menu also offers to load an INIT patch or reload the current patch without latest changes.

Last but not least having just a 2 octave keyboard at the Sub Phatty (and also with the Bass Station 2) is much too few for me. I need at least 3 octaves for playing e.g. Lead sounds. Sometime i use even more (have the Pulse 2 conected to my 6 octaves Motif ES 7).


As a conclusion the Pulse 2 for me is a perfect combination of a real analog sound engine, tons of features and a modern and highly usable user interface (which also includes the graphical display).
Overall the Sub Phatty and several other synths are too limited or too different to be compared directly. The Bass Station II seems to be closer in terms of features while it also misses a few like e.g. adjustable filter keytracking (in the Pulse 2 this could go up to 200% and you could also set negative keytracking).

Besides the different interface also the MFB Dominion X should be comparable to the Pulse 2 as it includes several of it's features like e.g. 3 Oscs, a multimode filter and other comparable features. I admit that some features of the Dominion X seem to be superior to the Pulse 2 like additional filter modes (e.g. 18dB LPF, Notch), FM routings and waveshaping. Same should be true about the Dominion 1 keyboard.



Ingo

[Ingonator]

edit

[Kriminal]

could you copy the whole manual and paste it here...or maybe record yourself reading it out loud and post the audio files?

[Aural Chaos]

could you copy the whole manual and paste it here...or maybe record yourself reading it out loud and post the audio files?

Dude, you are just trolling at this point, if not for the past several weeks.
We know you have issues with Ingo, we know you aren't even interested in the Pulse 2, so why not just give it a rest?