Official Arturia VCollection5 thread

[ENV1]

Task Manager

[fmr]

You forgot that Mini V has a new filter code, that may influence RAM consumption. Did you test other plug-ins (for example Matrix 12-V that was a relatively new plug-in)?

[ENV1]

No, ive checked only the minimoog.

But ive just fired up the ARPs and its a similar picture:

V2: 18,4MB

V3: 70,0MB @ 60% UI Size

EDIT: Goes down to 66,5MB after usage settled.

Dont feel like going through all the other sizes, i think the difference is clear.

[PAK]

Task Manager

Sysinternals Process Explorer and VMMap will show you more info, but different hosts handle memory differently.

For example Cubase may load a VST3 plugin without loading the graphical resources. That's why there can be a delay when opening an interface initially, as it's not actually in memory even though the plugin is active.

Following your guide a Cubase user might report 26MB until opening the interface. That number would then change again as they closed the GUI. The memory usage is not fixed and depends both on the plugin and on how a host manages memory.

The numbers you listed aren't too bad IMO, at least compared to a lot of plugins. The main thing is that the memory doesn't leak. Arturia tend to fair better than average here, based on my own experience. Things like this matter more than the initial impression you get from ram usage.

Also, if someone can afford to actually buy these plugins they can not only afford an SSD, they can also afford to fully load their systems ram. This isn't 1995, and even the lastest consumer desktop DDR4 systems will cost about US $400 to fully load with 128GB of ram. Older machines will likely cost less. EG the first generation of 24GB i7 systems will cost under $150 to max out.

Which isn't to justify not being better with resources. But it is saying, if you're actually able to buy the plugins, it can be made a fairly moot point..

[plexuss]

You forgot that Mini V has a new filter code, that may influence RAM consumption. Did you test other plug-ins (for example Matrix 12-V that was a relatively new plug-in)?

Can you point me to something official from arturia that documents the mini filter change mentioned? I cant find any official info on changed between 4 and 5 especially related to sound quality changes.

[ENV1]

The numbers you listed aren't too bad IMO

I dont think so either.

Its not 'great', but its acceptable.

Ive seen worse.

[fmr]

You forgot that Mini V has a new filter code, that may influence RAM consumption. Did you test other plug-ins (for example Matrix 12-V that was a relatively new plug-in)?

Can you point me to something official from arturia that documents the mini filter change mentioned? I cant find any official info on changed between 4 and 5 especially related to sound quality changes.

I don't remember where I got this information (maybe during the beta) but you're right - I couldn't find any official mention to it, which is strange But there are some unofficial sources around the net confirming it, and we can check by comparing both versions.

[plexuss]

You forgot that Mini V has a new filter code, that may influence RAM consumption. Did you test other plug-ins (for example Matrix 12-V that was a relatively new plug-in)?

Can you point me to something official from arturia that documents the mini filter change mentioned? I cant find any official info on changed between 4 and 5 especially related to sound quality changes.

I don't remember where I got this information (maybe during the beta) but you're right - I couldn't find any official mention to it, which is strange But there are some unofficial sources around the net confirming it, and we can check by comparing both versions.

I compared both versions and they sound the same. I posted a video back in the thread on the 20s pages somewhere.

Ok I will assume they made no sound engine changes until they say otherwise. thanks.

[fmr]

I compared both versions and they sound the same. I posted a video back in the thread on the 20s pages somewhere.

Ok I will assume they made no sound engine changes until they say otherwise. thanks.

I'll check your video, but I just checked (again), and with the same parameters, you definitely get different sound.

[plexuss]

I compared both versions and they sound the same. I posted a video back in the thread on the 20s pages somewhere.

Ok I will assume they made no sound engine changes until they say otherwise. thanks.

I'll check your video, but I just checked (again), and with the same parameters, you definitely get different sound.

Yes, I found the new mini slightly brighter with the same parameters. but if you turn the cutoff down a bit, they sound the same. this doesn't tell me the filter changed, it tells me that they changed the control scaling.

[ENV1]

Heres a comparison clip.

(Its the preset i transferred manually from the old format into the new format.)

The difference is obvious: V3 is much brighter and has very clean treble.

V2 comes first, then V3.

click

[fmr]

I compared both versions and they sound the same. I posted a video back in the thread on the 20s pages somewhere.

Ok I will assume they made no sound engine changes until they say otherwise. thanks.

I'll check your video, but I just checked (again), and with the same parameters, you definitely get different sound.

Yes, I found the new mini slightly brighter with the same parameters. but if you turn the cutoff down a bit, they sound the same. this doesn't tell me the filter changed, it tells me that they changed the control scaling.

No, it's not just that. To me, the new filter is more precise, like as if it has more cutoff precision, giving a much more detailed sound. This allows for much better and more controllable results in resonance too. The older filter sounds more "fuzzy" to me. Turning the cutoff down doesn't give me the same results in both. Try with the first patch of Mini V 2 (K.U_3osc).

[plexuss]

I compared both versions and they sound the same. I posted a video back in the thread on the 20s pages somewhere.

Ok I will assume they made no sound engine changes until they say otherwise. thanks.

I'll check your video, but I just checked (again), and with the same parameters, you definitely get different sound.

Yes, I found the new mini slightly brighter with the same parameters. but if you turn the cutoff down a bit, they sound the same. this doesn't tell me the filter changed, it tells me that they changed the control scaling.

No, it's not just that. To me, the new filter is more precise, like as if it has more cutoff precision, giving a much more detailed sound. This allows for much better and more controllable results in resonance too. The older filter sounds more "fuzzy" to me. Turning the cutoff down doesn't give me the same results in both. Try with the first patch of Mini V 2 (K.U_3osc).

I think q better comparison is to dial them in so they sound as similar as possible. I dont think you can rely on using the same param values as it appears they changed they scaling. so far to my ears 4 and 5 sound the same. hopefully arturia will confirm or deny sound quality changes but so far no word.

[SJ_Digriz]

I think q better comparison is to dial them in so they sound as similar as possible. I dont think you can rely on using the same param values as it appears they changed they scaling. so far to my ears 4 and 5 sound the same. hopefully arturia will confirm or deny sound quality changes but so far no word.

They put out plenty of word before, during and after the update ... But, just to eliminate the debate.

[SJ_Digriz]

I will also add that I can only tell any real difference with higher reso settings during sweeps. It seems to respond better to envolopes. And, it still doesn't sound like a Model D.