KVR Audio

louderr · Post by **louderr** » Thu Apr 07, 2016 10:26 pm

Not sure if this is legal on this forum. I'm a newbie but i just watched a great video and noticed the programmer was using filter 2 a lot. Since that filter has been unpopular vote-wise, I thought I'd post the link and give it a chance! I'm gonna do my own experiments later today then drop a vote. Great to be a member of this forum-- I've been lurking for a long time but this new project got me all involved. Heavy props to URS for involving the community like this. I love his synths but haven't had $$ to buy one yet so I'm very grateful for the free toys he gives us

-Geza X

louderr · Post by **louderr** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:28 am

Update: So I tried it this afternoon and personally I think #1 is the fattest and most analog. #2 had extremely useful "lo-fi" artifacts that I found very pleasing, like 12-bit equipment. #3 and #4 cut in and out and did strange things on my computer (2.2 GHz Intel Core i7) so I couldn't really test them. #5 was okay but didn't stand out. RECOMMENDATION: Make #1 the main filter and keep #2 also as a lo-fi option. They both sound really good.

louderr · Post by **louderr** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:35 am

Oh, another thing: When filter 4 works for me, which it does on some settings, it seems to push the pitch flat. Has anyone else noticed that?

wagtunes · Post by **wagtunes** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:49 am

Okay, I listened to all of these again. The only one that really sticks out like a sore thumb is 1. Between 6 and 7, if you toggle the mod wheel, you can hear a definite uneven drop in volume that you don't get from the other filters. 5 is the smoothest but there really isn't a ton of difference between it and the other 3. 1 is absolutely the most crude but also has the most character. So depending on what I'm looking for, I'd probably want 1 and 5 or 1 and at least one of the other ones in the final product.

louderr · Post by **louderr** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:50 am

PS the triangle wave on Osc 2 is really soft compared to the others, I know this is not a release yet but wanted to point that out for future ref

Dasheesh · Post by **Dasheesh** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 1:02 am

Sounds like some of you are mixing up your SC with MOOG.

panavisitor · Post by **panavisitor** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 3:56 am

Honestly Urs, you and your team could not have chosen a better synth to model. It's a perfect choice. ThePro-One is almost the most iconic of all for me, so THANK YOU.

After playing it for a few hours arp and drone while mapped to the potentiometers on my Novation 61SL MKII, I am most convinced by filter #5. It's the most analog and lovely sounding to me (2 is also nice but not quite as great). It breaks up very nicely and has a depth I think the others are lacking.

Synthetic Wav · Post by **Synthetic Wav** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 8:09 am

3 seems the one that work decently on about everyhting but its sometimes beaten ..still think it s the most all round , it s better to have a filter that is decent and sound good on about everyhting insteed of one or 2 trick pony that sound amazing on some sound but sux for others..

filters 5 and 1 for example when fmed it seems they break too early on the top, it s limiting a lot their use for this making it hard to be satisfied depending the sound after.. 5 is also darker, it will probably sound great for lower octave sound but again it s a limiting factor for mids and specially high sound it may perform not very good , limiting the use of the synth

ols · Post by **ols** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 3:27 pm

Hi all,

Very difficult to choose ...
For me, let's go for 3 4 5 !

Olivier

david.beholder · Post by **david.beholder** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 8:18 pm

I think it's about time to post results!

Urs · Post by **Urs** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 9:15 pm

david.beholder wrote:I think it's about time to post results!

4 days in? After 5 months of work? Nah... give us a few weeks...

david.beholder · Post by **david.beholder** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 9:20 pm

Urs wrote:
david.beholder wrote:I think it's about time to post results!
4 days in? After 5 months of work? Nah... give us a few weeks...

Looks like you're enjoying it

shroom81 · Post by **shroom81** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 9:26 pm

To me it's 3 and 5 that take the cake but I agree people here with it being difficult to tell them apart, imo nr. 5 is sounding the "smoothest" and I reckon that is the cpu hog

It's a damn fine sounding synth and I can't wait for the final release! I have longed for a pro-1 for frigging ages

chaosmeister · Post by **chaosmeister** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 9:32 pm

I don't really care which filter it'll be

. Lovely synth, in all its simple glory. If I had to pick, it would be 3 or 5, and definitely not 1. Guess I'll vote 3 eventually.

david.beholder · Post by **david.beholder** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 9:33 pm

shroom81 wrote:I reckon that is the cpu hog

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 4#p6432124

Urs: "The optimized version of the most expensive model uses around 5-10% per core on my machine whereas the non-optimized version of RePro-Alpha constantly uses 50-60%. I'd bet on factor 5-times-faster at least, if not 10 times faster for the final version and definitely nowhere near the CPU hunger of recent Roland releases (which I love sound-wise)."

KVR Audio

Repro-1 (out now)

To your ears, which filter behaves most analogue