Repro-1 (out now)

[malachy5]

Don't rely on my words.. go and try it.

You mean, like this?

Well, I was meaning more creating specific sounds than looking at graphs.. But visual information is one method.. Sure!

The problem is.. it's visual information.. about audio..

So the information it communicates is rather limited.. If it wasn't then your job would be a lot easier, wouldn't it?

Best to stick with ears, where possible.

Fortunately, when it comes to ladder filters, there's several very good options today.. Monark and Legend being the obvious ones. Legend, in particular, does a lot to put these issues to bed.. Too buzzy? Not enough? Dial calibration to taste..

No, it just shows that by objective means, it's rubbish to dismiss Diva's ladder filter implementation as "attenuating bass" more than, say, Monark. Your ears may tell you otherwise, but then that's you subjective experience, not a fact.

Ah Urs, surely you realise that we live in a post fact world! Opinions are now as valid as scientific consensus so any objection to personal subjective experience is an elitist obstacle to making analog great again (MAGA!).

[Numanoid]

The patch EH Disco Bass Line 1 is just spot on for New Order's Face Up

[martinjuenke]

Don't rely on my words.. go and try it.

You mean, like this?

Well, I was meaning more creating specific sounds than looking at graphs.. But visual information is one method.. Sure!

The problem is.. it's visual information.. about audio..

So the information it communicates is rather limited.. If it wasn't then your job would be a lot easier, wouldn't it?

Best to stick with ears, where possible.

Fortunately, when it comes to ladder filters, there's several very good options today.. Monark and Legend being the obvious ones. Legend, in particular, does a lot to put these issues to bed.. Too buzzy? Not enough? Dial calibration to taste..

No, it just shows that by objective means, it's rubbish to dismiss Diva's ladder filter implementation as "attenuating bass" more than, say, Monark. Your ears may tell you otherwise, but then that's you subjective experience, not a fact.

Ah Urs, surely you realise that we live in a post fact world! Opinions are now as valid as scientific consensus so any objection to personal subjective experience is an elitist obstacle to making analog great again (MAGA!).

So right, but so sad as well

[Ned Bouhalassa]

For those still holding out on this wonderful synth, here's a little something I put together, featuring only REPRO and stock beats:
https://soundcloud.com/ned-bouhalassa/reprogrammed

[PAK]

surely you realise that we live in a post fact world! Opinions are now as valid as scientific consensus so any objection to personal subjective experience is an elitist obstacle to making analog great again (MAGA!).

And surely you realise you've posted an over-simplified response, apparently in order to confirm what a smart and scientifically rational person you are? Well, well done you..

What I was posting about is objective, in relation to the way the controls scale along with the resonance. Though whether it matters to you, and by how much, is subjective. I can agree I should've re-checked the source of my thoughts before posting. Whilst I do actually know Diva well by now, I've moved away from computers more this past year or so.

Speaking more generally, where multiple variables become involved (like, oh, say.. a synthesizer?), it becomes difficult to pin down single factors which result in something. There is often a combination of things in play. Sometimes it's also not just about A and B either, but the method of how it goes between A and B.

Such things can be hard to "measure". But, just because a person provides their subjective experience of something, and fails to trace it back to all of the individual factors (which can then be "proven by science") it does not negate that there is more than "just their opinion" which may be at the root of those experiences.

In such cases it helps others, not least a developer, if they can attempt to elaborate on what they're saying. Especially because a big issue, for synthesizers, is user error. And, the more complex a synth is, the more true that becomes.

In Diva's case, for example, you might talk about the variations in analogue circuits compared to alternatives. To emulate these things, in Diva, you might have to make efforts to copy the drift of the filter or on an individual oscillator level with Tunemod. If you fail to try these things, along with trimmers and modifications settings, then you are often likely to be under-estimating its abilities.

If I were then to say it still can't quite emulate the phase drift, in the same way that a certain analogue synth might, how do you propose to "prove" that statement using "scientific consensus"? Basically, you'd have to provide an audio example, which tries to show that the basic LFO movement isn't quite covering it, and hope to have their (subjective) ears agree with yours!

Synths, which are more of a 1:1 type thing, like RePro, put the burdens more back towards the dev again, rather than the end user. But, even then, RePro has enough variables that user error can't be ruled out.

The difficulty, especially for emulative things from the analogue domain, is measurements can only communicate specific things. If you've ever spoken to a dev about these matters you'd know that, ultimately, a lot still comes down to their own subjective ears! Even assuming you can measure every single thing, you then have to deal with approximating problems in order to deliver something which is useable on most of todays CPU's, which then starts to involve some subjectivity again.

Oh, then there's the small matter of the way we hear things. If you think that scientific understanding, of human hearing, is even remotely close to complete then please spend less time on KVR, and more time providing the world with the cure for tinnitus..

In the wider big bad world, where incomplete understandings frequently still exist, there are heavy financial incentives which accompany certain findings over others. Science still has to deal with the fact that it takes humans to interpret data, and implement models, and humans are still subject to the same flaws and limitations that they always have been.

Whilst the hope is that scientific methods will eventually find the truth, it's not always possible within the relatively limited time spans we might have on this earth.

If you follow science to (some peoples definition) of its logical conclusion, the great overwhelming likelihood is that we live in a computer simulation, and don't exist. Just ask Elon Musk. So don't fret, you don't exist, so there's no need to worry about anything, is there? And, if ever the majority of scientific consensus agrees with that point then, logically, it must be true

Oh, and I know this response is likely wasted. When someone has to bring anti-Trump nonsense, into a synth thread, I'm aware I'm dealing with a very special individual

[Numanoid]

What is the beef here ?

Repro-1 is just a decent synth, keenly priced, take it or leave it

[PAK]

What is the beef here ?

Psst.. Skimming text might lead to wrong conclusions

No beef with RePro. In fact, its 3 "flavours" of filter (crispy, rounded, and driven) go some way towards addressing the sorts of issues presented by calibration/component variation etc, whilst still keeping it easy to use for its end users..

Usually these sorts of differences, you might encounter, have either no solution, or have to be worked around using the synths modulation system instead etc..

[Numanoid]

No beef with RePro.

Great

So thread back on topic then

[Caine123]

i really like repro and am just demoing it, especially the new sequencer (DIVA pleasE?) but what i hate authentic or not is to be limited with polyphony. some sounds i would love to play with more than 1 key at the same time....

[exmatproton]

i really like repro and am just demoing it, especially the new sequencer (DIVA pleasE?) but what i hate authentic or not is to be limited with polyphony. some sounds i would love to play with more than 1 key at the same time....

Yeah,,i have the same feeling about that. Luckily one can use some midi trickery to get polyphony. But, indeed, since this possible anyway, i don't see why dev's are still like "...the original was mono, so we are going to make it mono...". Now you have to open 2 or more (depending on how many voices one wants) instances and apply some trickery to get poly, which is just plain stupid.

On this little beast i would love to see a max of 6 voices (mono, duo, 2 poly, 4 poly and 6 poly).

[Caine123]

i really like repro and am just demoing it, especially the new sequencer (DIVA pleasE?) but what i hate authentic or not is to be limited with polyphony. some sounds i would love to play with more than 1 key at the same time....

Yeah,,i have the same feeling about that. Luckily one can use some midi trickery to get polyphony. But, indeed, since this possible anyway, i don't see why dev's are still like "...the original was mono, so we are going to make it mono...". Now you have to open 2 or more (depending on how many voices one wants) instances and apply some trickery to get poly, which is just plain stupid.

On this little beast i would love to see a max of 6 voices (mono, duo, 2 poly, 4 poly and 6 poly).

if it gets polyphony i will add it asap! even i got already diva.

[Urs]

Ok, let's try this:

Repro-1 internally uses a mathematical model based on the network of resistors/resistances inside the original hardware. Polyphony would require an alternative network, thus the sound would be different.

Alternatively we could do what people do with specialized host software: Build a 4-voice style poly synth built out of an array of monosynths. This is something we reserve to do in the future, and for which we would likely charge a much higher price. We're not doing that right now because we want to target the 99$ segment.

[bibz1st]

What is it with you guys keep going on about polyphony, the Pro One was mono, Repro is mono, Urs has said that's the way its stayin so quit bangin on about it for fecks sake...

[Caine123]

What is it with you guys keep going on about polyphony, the Pro One was mono, Repro is mono, Urs has said that's the way its stayin so quit bangin on about it for fecks sake...

yeah stay old school and dont use the possibilities of today's techhnology! hooray!

[bibz1st]

No far from it, its just every time I view this thread about repro people are asking for polyphony which was not what the Pro One was about. Sorry about the rant by the way, no offence intended