UVI Falcon - v4 = 2026 released - rumors, ads, praise, kindergarden, auto-sampling and off-topic inside!

[wagtunes]

Well, it's taken me a while to wrap my head around the architecture but I've finally gotten the hang of it. I personally find tree structure the easiest way to construct a sound. Right click and add. Very simple and very intuitive and you can see everything right there in front of you in what I call outline form. Want to go to the specific detail? Just click on the line and Falcon takes you right there. In fact, this may be one of the easiest interfaces to navigate of all my more "complex" synths (Omni, Zebra, MUX, etc.)

Really enjoying this. Sound is excellent. Possibilities are limitless. There are a couple of bugs (to be expected) but I'm positive that they will be taken care of quickly.

Might very well turn out to be my best purchase of the year and I wouldn't be surprised if it was named Synth of the year, if such an award exists. I honestly don't really follow popularity contests but if there is one, Falcon should be the winner for 2015.

[GospelMusicians]

I don't think some of you guys understand business licensing and how it works.

For example, I license my Neo-Soul Keys sounds and samples to Steinberg. Steinberg has been selling a Halion version of Neo-Soul Keys for close to two years now. Steinberg can do whatever they want with the samples as long as it abides by the contract. But that doesn't inhibit me from making Neo-Soul Keys 4.0, and major updates on the iOS, UVI, and Kontakt. If Steinberg doesn't update the Neo-Soul Keys and offer discounts and patches, then it's not my fault that Steinberg doesn't update it.

Now that being said, I recently had an update for all Neo-Soul Keys users to upgrade to Neo-Soul Kes 4.0. The Steinberg users wanted to take advantage of it. Well, I didn't plan on it, but I appreciated their business and honored it, if they could provide an invoice. So to your point, I do understand the frustration, but at the same time. UVI is the licensor, not the licensee. You can't fault UVI for updates MachFive has or has not done. You also can't fault UVI for coming out with their own product, because it is their platform and their business. Wouldn't the issue be more with the company that has not satisfied your updates?

For example, people who purchased my Neo-Soul Keys for iOS wanted to take advantage of the sale, but I wouldn't allow it and customers understood.

My point being is that perhaps people are blaming the wrong parties here. I do understand the frustration and I predicted this would happen, but you have to be somewhat reasonable on who the responsible parties are. UVI is not MOTU and MOTU is not UVI. Both companies exist to provide value and to make money. I think the issue is that MOTU and UVI workstation both shared the .ufs library, which is understandable, but they are not the same company.

[maximoog]

Is it possible to make a Feature Request thread for Falcon here on kvr?

[Hans25]

I don't think some of you guys understand business licensing and how it works.

But UVI has developed everything for Machfive now haven't they? So when they upgrade the engine and cut the relationship with Motu that makes Machfive customers left with a product that won't be updated no matter if it was purchased 2 weeks ago. Didn't UVI earn on Machfive customers?

It's not forbidden to think of the customers when you license your code to third parties. Personally I don't care about the vendors I only care about the product.

Personally I think that giving Steinberg a license to use your sample library with the same name but not wanting to update the license for those users is bad customer policy. If you make an agreement with Steinberg you should make an agreement in advance to take care of their customers when it's your product unless you want to destroy your own brand and have angry customers. When you let another company release a library with your brand then customers are buying the product believing that you will support it with updates. Why would you put your name on if people are not supposed to think that it's your product being sold through Steinberg?

By the way wasn't it you that sent out e-mails to gospelmusicians customers claiming that people should by the library fast because you were "running out" of licenses? Then people got a second e-mail where you explained that some customers had complained about the claim that you were running out of licenses. Then you responded with a second email stating that you just were a distributor reselling a total number of licenses. But now you developed it yourself anyway? Hmm strange.

[Hans25]

Use Save Program and Samples as

When are you revealing the offer for Machfive owners?

[otristan]

Is it possible to make a Feature Request thread for Falcon here on kvr?

You are allowed to do everything you want on KvR

[otristan]

Use Save Program and Samples as

When are you revealing the offer for Machfive owners?

If no technical issue arise, tomorrow.

[Shabdahbriah]

But if I chose "Save Program and Samples" I expect it to do just that. What is the point of this command if samples are not saved?
I find this confusing and non-obvious.

Cheers,

Tom

In Falcon you can alter sample content with destructive sample operation. (see right click in wave editor of Sample oscillator)
Save Program and Samples save those modification inside the sample in their existing location.

Hm. Okay.
If I know it, it makes kind of sense, but if you start fresh with the software, this is not really obvious IMO.

So I will have to remember to always use "Save Program and Samples as...", even if it goes again the grain of what feels "natural" to me.

Thanks for your patience!

Tom

fwiw: I'm glad this topic came up, as it is an important "habit" to acquire. Although this may 'seem' counter-intuitive, it is a common "destructive editing" parameter.

e.g. In Soundforge {my default editor since v.1}, I open the file: "mynosehairswhistle.wav", crop it, adjust volume ~ what-ever. Hit "save" (as above), it saves those changes... notwithstanding "undo options", it is a done deal. That is now my 'base' wav, for further manipulation.

Thereafter, when working with that file, I'll choose "save as", and in my typically meditatively frenzied 'fsu' mode, will do the lazy/ubiquitous, [name]_01, or [name]_001, on my first mod/edit, and number sequentially from there, while retaining the original file, unchanged.

(I know that info is grossly remedial to many here, but I felt it worth noting for those not so familiar with it.)

I'm definitely buying this before the intro price expires, as I too look for and see the potential "ROI".

Thanks to Simon, Mario, otristan {congrats on the two babies, btw} and all the others who helped make that decision, viable.

[Sampleconstruct]

Could I have a listen to that mynosehairswhistle.wav? Could be a great source for metphysical re-synthesis...

[UltimateOutsider]

Technical question: MachFive can open SF2 SoundFont files. It "mounts" them the same way it mounts sound banks, and you can browse to the individual patches inside. I have not seen MachFive open SFZ files, but I don't know whether they're supposed to be supported.

With Falcon, I haven't managed to open either SF2 or SFZ files.

(I tried the Merlin GM and Arachnoid GM SF2 files and the Plogue Sfzorzando SFZ files.)

Is SF2 or SFZ import supposed to work with Falcon?

[Sampleconstruct]

Technical question: MachFive can open SF2 SoundFont files. It "mounts" them the same way it mounts sound banks, and you can browse to the individual patches inside. I have not seen MachFive open SFZ files, but I don't know whether they're supposed to be supported.

With Falcon, I haven't managed to open either SF2 or SFZ files.

(I tried the Merlin GM and Arachnoid GM SF2 files and the Plogue Sfzorzando SFZ files.)

Is SF2 or SFZ import supposed to work with Falcon?

Here is a vid on opening sfz files, just drag and drom them into an empty program slot:

[ThomasHelzle]

fwiw: I'm glad this topic came up, as it is an important "habit" to acquire. Although this may 'seem' counter-intuitive, it is a common "destructive editing" parameter.

e.g. In Soundforge {my default editor since v.1}, I open the file: "mynosehairswhistle.wav", crop it, adjust volume ~ what-ever. Hit "save" (as above), it saves those changes... notwithstanding "undo options", it is a done deal. That is now my 'base' wav, for further manipulation.

Thereafter, when working with that file, I'll choose "save as", and in my typically meditatively frenzied 'fsu' mode, will do the lazy/ubiquitous, [name]_01, or [name]_001, on my first mod/edit, and number sequentially from there, while retaining the original file, unchanged.

I have no problem with the "save"/"save as" principle.
I use it for about 3 decades in literally hundreds of software applications each day.
I would say I have it down pat.
Still I find it not really clear in Falcon what happens when from the get go.
I can't explain well why I fear.
I think the problem is, that there are several levels to what happens in each case.
Hopefully I understood it now and will not accidentally ruin any sample libraries, and thankfully there are requesters in some cases that warn/ask you about what will happen.

Would be interesting to re-think the structure a bit and make it more visually obvious what has changed and what will be saved where.
Some 3D applications I work with (for instance Lightwave 3D) have very informative save screens where everything that is getting saved is shown with the respective paths. So it is totally clear what will happen (and you can even change it in the dialogue).
Such a screen could also contain some consolidate/search for missing samples/relocate options etc. or allow to set up custom user-file paths per project (something very common in 3D apps, not so common in VSTs, but Falcon has reached a complexity where it may make sense to start thinking in this direction).

Cheers,

Tom

[ThomasHelzle]

Technical question: MachFive can open SF2 SoundFont files. It "mounts" them the same way it mounts sound banks, and you can browse to the individual patches inside. I have not seen MachFive open SFZ files, but I don't know whether they're supposed to be supported.

With Falcon, I haven't managed to open either SF2 or SFZ files.

(I tried the Merlin GM and Arachnoid GM SF2 files and the Plogue Sfzorzando SFZ files.)

Is SF2 or SFZ import supposed to work with Falcon?

In my tests, only "simple" SFZ worked, the ones from Sforzando have extended scripting/GUI stuff and didn't work here either. It was overall quite some hit and miss.
SF2 does not work. SFZ is the only supported import format.

Cheers,

Tom

[GospelMusicians]

I don't think some of you guys understand business licensing and how it works.

But UVI has developed everything for Machfive now haven't they? So when they upgrade the engine and cut the relationship with Motu

You assume UVI cut the relationship with MOTU. You assume that UVI had a choice in the matter. Have you ever considered that maybe MOTU broke the contract. Have you considered maybe that MOTU won't allow upgrade discounts that compete with MachFive.

There are soooo soo many variables and you are only painting a picture one way, but after being in this business for long enough, you never know how many layers of details.

For the record, I totally agree with your frustration. My support E-mails have been blowing up, even before Falcon of users wanting to use our libraries with M5.

All I'm saying is that you are assuming UVI can do something and the reality may just be that based on contracts, trademarks, copyrights, or whatever....Maybe they can't! I don't know...

[Hans25]

Use Save Program and Samples as

When are you revealing the offer for Machfive owners?

If no technical issue arise, tomorrow.

Ok sounds good .