Repro-1 (out now)

[izonin]

Cat out of the bag: We're contemplating (read: not promising anything) the design of a polyphonic MIDI module that can host a small number of RePros. Maybe just enough to play a chord. However this idea stands or falls with the ability to provide CV input connectivity - which is a major hassle in plug-in-land. In actual fact, it might never happen, or if it happens, maybe not in the best way we would have loved to.

Nevertheless. RePro has been started as a Research Project on many levels. Apart from filter stuff we're also evaluating the move from control rate to audio rate for any modulation (-> Zebra3, Berlin Modular). Furthermore we're evaluating the move from event-based voice control (MIDI events) to audio stream based voice management (Trigger+Gate+CV), which we hope may minimise the complexity we have faced with voice management in our polyphonic synths. As such, developing a polyphonic MIDI-to-CV converter with proper voice logic is part of the research project, but not necessarily part of this product development.

We'll see...

Been doing this for ages (basically since multicore processors came out) with multiple instances of Reaktor.

[aaron aardvark]

Urs,
A polyphonic RePro would be nice! Would that take significantly less CPU than separate tracks of RePro running simultaneously?

themusicproducerblog,
Thank you for the free patches! I will try them later.

[spunkmuffin]

Playing this thing with a touch of delay and reverb made my jaw drop a little but I'm cool.

[aaron aardvark]

I sometimes use duct tape to hold up my lower jaw.

[bcm70]

Playing this thing with a touch of delay and reverb made my jaw drop a little but I'm cool.

I agree. It's fantastic.

[Urs]

I am confused here. Do you mean you are thinking about developping a sort of software rack where we could load many instances of RePro at once and play them like a polyphonic keyboard? A sort of Oberheim 4-Voice based on RePro?

and about this switch from MIDI events to Trigger+Gate+CV, how would that work in a DAW? just curious, I have no idea how this could be feasible. Or Am I lost and you are thinking about a piece of hardware?

We're developing RePro to internally use only CV/Gate/Trigger signals. The MIDI events that it receives from the host software are a list of events. This list is translated into sample streams, i.e. it's basically converted from loose MIDI events to CV streams in sample buffers. This happens internally before the actual synth is processed. While that's pretty trivial, it's a change of everything about the way we used to deal with voice management.

We will at some point try this out for a polyphonic setup. I have high hopes that some of the complexity of voice management can be reduced and thus maintenance effort lowered. If however we do this with a small array of RePro-1s and whether this may lead to a polyphonic version, I can neither confirm nor deny.

[ATN69]

I am confused here. Do you mean you are thinking about developping a sort of software rack where we could load many instances of RePro at once and play them like a polyphonic keyboard? A sort of Oberheim 4-Voice based on RePro?

and about this switch from MIDI events to Trigger+Gate+CV, how would that work in a DAW? just curious, I have no idea how this could be feasible. Or Am I lost and you are thinking about a piece of hardware?

We're developing RePro to internally use only CV/Gate/Trigger signals. The MIDI events that it receives from the host software are a list of events. This list is translated into sample streams, i.e. it's basically converted from loose MIDI events to CV streams in sample buffers. This happens internally before the actual synth is processed. While that's pretty trivial, it's a change of everything about the way we used to deal with voice management.

We will at some point try this out for a polyphonic setup. I have high hopes that some of the complexity of voice management can be reduced and thus maintenance effort lowered. If however we do this with a small array of RePro-1s and whether this may lead to a polyphonic version, I can neither confirm nor deny.

But if the idea is to try this out for a polyphonic setup, why not just do it in RePro? ..yeah I am fishing here

[Urs]

But if the idea is to try this out for a polyphonic setup, why not just do it in RePro? ..yeah I am fishing here

Hehehe, I'll let you know in a few months.

[Vesius]

I am super excited for audio rate modulations across the board.

One of the things that held me back from buying Hive was that I couldn't *quite* get a steady sound from the envelopes when doing extreme pitch modulation (ie making swept sine kick drums) running in real time, in much the same way as Zebra 2. I would have loved the ability to just eliminate this as an issue in my process, although, I completely appreciate that this wasn't what this synth (Hive) was about.

[KnickersDown]

Three cheers for filter 3!
Filter 3 is the king. Long live filter 3.

Filter 5 is complete crap. It sounds like a filter from a softsynth from 1998.

Urs, when you do the final version, please include a way to control the filter via midi or CV so the values can snap and not ramp. The Pro-one has a port at the back for doing this and it's a very important feature. Thank you.

[spunkmuffin]

Three cheers for filter 3!

For future reference the tally is currently:

filter 1 - 61 votes
filter 2 - 17 votes
filter 3 - 60 votes
filter 4 - 79 votes
filter 5 - 51 votes

So for now more people think filter 1 sounds more analogue than filter 3. Bizarro!

[Urs]

So for now more people think filter 1 sounds more analogue than filter 3. Bizarro!

That's probably because some people attribute "analogue" to "imperfect" or even "broken".

[EsmileZ]

TO me filter 5 is the one that you introduce to your parents and filter 1 the one that you have affair with...

Can t decide between 3 or 4.

[thomasueber]

TO me filter 5 is the one that you introduce to your parents and filter 1 the one that you have affair with...

Can t decide between 3 or 4.

Let me decide for you. You want to marry Filter 3.

[fmr]

So for now more people think filter 1 sounds more analogue than filter 3. Bizarro!

That's probably because some people attribute "analogue" to "imperfect" or even "broken".

Yes, that's what I wrote. Analogue "can" sound pretty smooth and clean.