KVR Audio

ducelare · Post by **ducelare** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 9:46 pm

most analog sounding, in this order:

F5 > F2 > F3 > F4 > F1

with F5 most analog and F1 most digital sounding.

cheers!

street spirit · Post by **street spirit** » Fri Apr 08, 2016 10:54 pm

Wow super cool thanks for this

Flux302 · Post by **Flux302** » Sat Apr 09, 2016 2:39 am

I have been sitting here for a few hours a/b testing back and fourth... can't decide which I like the most. I don't own a pro one so I am demoting with other Curtis filters that I own. (Tempest and P12) of course those are different chips etc ... but hey its the closest I have lol. really enjoying this test. I find the largest changes when modulating the filter via VCO b ... I posted a sound cloud of the first testing I did with identical patches on the Tempest and RePro ... https://soundcloud.com/flux302/real-cur ... u-he-repro

aaron aardvark · Post by **aaron aardvark** » Sat Apr 09, 2016 8:37 am

I haven't experimented a whole lot, but I like #4 the best so far. Would it be fair to say I don't care which sounds the most analog, but which I like best? Though maybe the one I like best does sound the most analog.

V0RT3X · Post by **V0RT3X** » Sat Apr 09, 2016 8:47 am

I like #4

bsterz · Post by **bsterz** » Sat Apr 09, 2016 7:09 pm

So, I got my Pro One out... it's so glorious...

I'll see if I can get some fun A/B videos together. It's hard not to just noodle with the Pro One though.

It's a membrane keyboard - so so bad. But dayum. Just good sounds all day.

I'll go back on what I said earlier about the point at which you really notice bass dropping out. The number is 2.5.

dbone · Post by **dbone** » Sun Apr 10, 2016 1:11 pm

Personally, I find #4 to be the "smoothest" across the full range of the sweep - especially at more pronounced oscillator settings. #5 was also smooth but seemed to be a bit less consistent across the full spectrum.

While it didn't sound quite as smooth as the others, I kept coming back to #3 which had an interesting character. While I don't have it anymore, it reminded me of my Prophet-600 in some respects.

#1 and #2 seemed to have some interesting harmonic artefacts at lower filter settings and more extreme oscillator configurations. Not that that's a bad thing - it makes them interesting and gives some character - but they were just not as smooth. They too reminded me of the P-600, but with a bit more "grit" in the filter.

I'll be interested to learn what's actually going with this when the blindfold comes off. Thanks to Urs and the gang - looks like you guys have another winner on your hands.

thomasueber · Post by **thomasueber** » Sun Apr 10, 2016 3:45 pm

Is it possible to see a picture to recognize the characteristic of the different filter-types?

Imho filter 1 & 4 are very same in shaping the sound.
Same to 2, 3 & 5. Very same.
That´s just the feeling i had while i moved the knob with my midi-keyboard and played some notes.
I tried different waveformes and octaves and mixing some noise to the oscillators. Like always.

With this configuration in the screenshot all filter-types sound very same when you only push the buttons (no movement of cutoff or resonance).

With this setting you can hear in every filter-type a slight difference when you push the buttons without moving knobs.

To be honestly. At this time i don´t know how much money i would spend for this plug-in. Especially because my Ableton with only these instrument goes up to 30%. My CPU can withstand a bit. Also with NI Reaktor and Kontakt...
(Quad-Core - i7 - 2600 - 3,4GHz + 16GB RAM - Win 7 Ultimate - 64 Bit)

My favorite filter, i hadn´t voted yet. Maybe No. 5. But i will wait and try a bit more.

Greetings,
Thomas

Funkybot's Evil Twin · Sun Apr 10, 2016 3:51 pm

Thomas, the code is running multiple filter algorithms at once so no one votes for the one with the highest CPU. Urs indicated that the release version will use something like 1/5th the CPU of the Alpha.

For testing, I also found that at static settings the filters could sound very similar, but once you increase the resonance and jack up the "Osc B - VCF Cutoff" knob, you'll start to really hear differences between the filter models, especially once you start tweaking the cutoff.

D.U.B78 · Post by **D.U.B78** » Sun Apr 10, 2016 4:00 pm

Only using the filter Cutoff, Resonance and Envelope Amount, filter model #1 sounds the best to me. Number 1 may not be the most analog, but it is my favorite. I left all other settings, as they would be when opening up the plug-in. The other settings, 2-5 sound not as full, I could not crank up the Resonance & Envelope Amount without losing something I liked.

Thanks so much for doing the project!

JPQ · Post by **JPQ** » Sun Apr 10, 2016 4:14 pm

Why this own plugin not expansion for DIVA? is there really good reason. and if this needs 16gigabytes ram i dont going test it anytime soon.

Urs · Post by **Urs** » Sun Apr 10, 2016 4:21 pm

JPQ wrote:Why this own plugin not expansion for DIVA? is there really good reason. and if this needs 16gigabytes ram i dont going test it anytime soon.

It was explained a few times. It will be explained a few more times once we finish this.

beely · Post by **beely** » Sun Apr 10, 2016 4:34 pm

JPQ wrote:Why this own plugin not expansion for DIVA? is there really good reason. and if this needs 16gigabytes ram i dont going test it anytime soon.

Yep, those with questions could just actually just please *read* the thread they are posting in, as all these things are answered multiple times...

Funkybot's Evil Twin · Sun Apr 10, 2016 5:11 pm

Urs, how much further (if at all) are these filters compared to what's in DIVA? Even though DIVA can be CPU intensive, overall, these filters seem much more unpredictable with more character. The closest thing I hear in DIVA is the Uhbie and maybe even the MS20 v1 filters. I'm just not sure how much of that is a product of the DIVA synths not having as colorful filters and extreme modulation, versus how much of that is this being a "next gen" type of U-he filter model if at all the case.

KingTuck · Post by **KingTuck** » Sun Apr 10, 2016 6:28 pm

beely wrote:
JPQ wrote:Why this own plugin not expansion for DIVA? is there really good reason. and if this needs 16gigabytes ram i dont going test it anytime soon.
Yep, those with questions could just actually just please *read* the thread they are posting in, as all these things are answered multiple times...

No offense to Urs or you here, but that information isn't as immediately accessible as you think. I browsed through the past 5 pages of this thread searching for the word "Diva" and I didn't find any answer to the question. I did the same with Urs post history and IDK if I missed it but I certainly didn't stumble upon the answer. Ridiculous to expect me to browse through almost 30 pages in this thread and the threads in the u-he subforum looking for a quick answer of a reasonable question.

If Urs doesn't want to answer it anymore he should have it posted in the OP of RePro threads. Why is this being considered as a potential separate product release when Diva could use it's Pro-One emulated modules in a product update? It is odd to think of this going down a different path when Diva is a semi-modular, varying vintage synth emu project. Anyone willing to answer this for me? Seems a few of you know, and it's more helpful than snarky "ITS BEEN ANSWERED BEFORE!" responses. If it's being asked too many times, it's a question people are interested in the answer to and Urs should pin it to the original post of these threads.

KVR Audio

Repro-1 (out now)

To your ears, which filter behaves most analogue