KVR Audio

Orbit-50 · Post by **Orbit-50** » Sat Dec 27, 2014 2:58 pm

I'm checking this out from my Nook because I'm on the toilet right now, and the Sylenth 1 sends an awesome low frequency vibration through my hands while the Hive file does it to a lesser extent. The Sylenth file sounds and feels fuller from my tiny Nook speaker. Could it be the programming is slightly different on both?

.-.

hakey · Post by **hakey** » Sat Dec 27, 2014 3:07 pm

Orbit-50 wrote: Could it be the programming is slightly different on both?

Some of the modmatrix amounts aren't visible in the Sylenth demo, so the recreation in Hive was done partly by ear.

There is an audible difference, but both clips sound equally good to me. At least, I don't hear any special magic in the original version.

Orbit-50 · Post by **Orbit-50** » Sat Dec 27, 2014 3:21 pm

Here's an idea, do a different preset but don't tell us which is which. This would be a better comparison. Don't try to pull a fast one either by using the same file for both which is what I would probably do just to save time and effort.

.-.

Orbit-50 · Post by **Orbit-50** » Sat Dec 27, 2014 3:26 pm

Now I gotta go to work with that stupid "Thank you for trying this demo" going around in my frooking head. Great.

.-.

tedlogan · Post by **tedlogan** » Sat Dec 27, 2014 3:27 pm

Orbit-50 wrote:Here's an idea, do a different preset but don't tell us which is which. This would be a better comparison. Don't try to pull a fast one either by using the same file for both which is what I would probably do just to save time and effort.

.-.

Bingo

fluffy_little_something · Sat Dec 27, 2014 3:45 pm

Orbit-50 wrote:Now I gotta go to work with that stupid "Thank you for trying this demo" going around in my frooking head. Great.

.-.

Yes, that does get on one's nerves, i.e. mission accomplished

The voice's volume is even independent of the volume set in Sylenth.

Anyway, regarding that patch down there, when playing around with the filter sections last night, I noticed what nasty sounds Sylenth can produce thanks to that third, common filter section or whatever it is. Basically it seems to work like an amplifier for the two filter sections, right?

Sendy · Post by **Sendy** » Sat Dec 27, 2014 3:52 pm

AFAIK, the common filter control is just a modifier for the filters in each layer. i.e. - you can add a global offset to both cutoff, resonance and drive amounts and automate them in tandem (parallel motion). What I did notice is that by ganging the amounts you can go way out of the usual drive range of having just one control. I think this works for resonance too. I have to admit, I love Sylenth's filter. If it's oscillators were a bit better I'd probably have picked it up.

fluffy_little_something · Sat Dec 27, 2014 4:02 pm

Sendy wrote:AFAIK, the common filter control is just a modifier for the filters in each layer. i.e. - you can add a global offset to both cutoff, resonance and drive amounts and automate them in tandem (parallel motion). What I did notice is that by ganging the amounts you can go way out of the usual drive range of having just one control. I think this works for resonance too. I have to admit, I love Sylenth's filter. If it's oscillators were a bit better I'd probably have picked it up.

Exactly, that is what I meant by amplifying. I more or less accidentally (I don't really like and use much resonance) made a sound last night, compared to which the patch below is quite tame. Mine sounded almost like a vocoder or formant sound

What is wrong with the oscillators? I like them, they deliver solid, neutral raw material for the filters. The only thing that is not so good is that one has to sacrifice two oscillators just in order to get one pulse wave. If you don't need to modulate the pw in any way, you can produce the pulse in either A or B, and use B or A for another sound. Else one even has to use A and B (one osc from each) because there is no modulation target like A1 Phase or B2 Phase.

But it's not really a problem, maybe the way the pulse is created also brings advantages. I noticed that unlike Dune, Hive, etc. there is no spatter sound whatsoever when using short attack times on any pulse width pulse signal, which is great

That was the main reason I opted for Sylenth instead of Hive, Dune, etc.

hakey · Post by **hakey** » Sat Dec 27, 2014 4:18 pm

One last go:

Take 2

And for reference, the original clip:

ARP 303 Saw

They are *ahem* somewhat different, but does the original clip really sound better?

Nokenoku · Post by **Nokenoku** » Sat Dec 27, 2014 4:23 pm

w00t o.O
Ok, those two now are seriously close.

If I wouldn't know better, I'd say it's the same synth with the same preset, just tweaked a bit in one of the two examples.

xamido · Post by **xamido** » Sat Dec 27, 2014 4:27 pm

hakey wrote:One last go:

Take 2

And for reference, the original clip:

ARP 303 Saw

They are *ahem* somewhat different, but does the original clip really sound better?

That's excellent. That patch should be in the factory soundbank, tounge in cheek patch.

Nokenoku · Post by **Nokenoku** » Sat Dec 27, 2014 4:36 pm

Yes, and it should be the default patch as well. xD

bmrzycki · Post by **bmrzycki** » Sat Dec 27, 2014 4:36 pm

hakey wrote:Take 2

Nicely done. It sounds very close and quite good in its own right.

Sendy · Post by **Sendy** » Sat Dec 27, 2014 4:37 pm

fluffy_little_something wrote:
Sendy wrote:AFAIK, the common filter control is just a modifier for the filters in each layer. i.e. - you can add a global offset to both cutoff, resonance and drive amounts and automate them in tandem (parallel motion). What I did notice is that by ganging the amounts you can go way out of the usual drive range of having just one control. I think this works for resonance too. I have to admit, I love Sylenth's filter. If it's oscillators were a bit better I'd probably have picked it up.
Exactly, that is what I meant by amplifying. I more or less accidentally (I don't really like and use much resonance) made a sound last night, compared to which the patch below is quite tame. Mine sounded almost like a vocoder or formant sound

What is wrong with the oscillators? I like them, they deliver solid, neutral raw material for the filters. The only thing that is not so good is that one has to sacrifice two oscillators just in order to get one pulse wave. If you don't need to modulate the pw in any way, you can produce the pulse in either A or B, and use B or A for another sound. Else one even has to use A and B (one osc from each) because there is no modulation target like A1 Phase or B2 Phase.

But it's not really a problem, maybe the way the pulse is created also brings advantages. I noticed that unlike Dune, Hive, etc. there is no spatter sound whatsoever when using short attack times on any pulse width pulse signal, which is great That was the main reason I opted for Sylenth instead of Hive, Dune, etc.

No pulsewidth modulation (the phase cancellation trick isn't REALLY PWM, it's through-zero phasing and lacks the control and versatility of PWM), it's unstable across the keyrange, and there's something about the square wave that's a bit off to my ears. Frizzy. Since square and variable pulse are my most used waveforms, that's a bit of a letdown.

Hive doesn't have sync or FM, but at least it has PWM that is fully controllable!

Urs · Post by **Urs** » Sat Dec 27, 2014 4:45 pm

fluffy_little_something wrote:
But it's not really a problem, maybe the way the pulse is created also brings advantages. I noticed that unlike Dune, Hive, etc. there is no spatter sound whatsoever when using short attack times on any pulse width pulse signal, which is great That was the main reason I opted for Sylenth instead of Hive, Dune, etc.

The "spatter sound" will certainly be fixed before release.

- Urs

Now Hive is here, is it RIP Sylenth?