Arturia V Collection 6

[Stefken]

Do an audio of a few minutes of noodling around on, say, the Arturia JP8m using a variety of features, vs the Roland Cloud JP8, and many many people would reliably be able to pick them, as you have enough information to make informed decisions.

I didn't mention it above but the JP8 was the first synth I was thinking about. I find it one of the least succesfull emulations of Arturia, certainly V2 .

The difference is pretty obvious.

Except of course to those who disagree with you. I remember specific examples of successful musicians who owned real JP8s that thought it was quite good. Not to mention each real Jupiter 8 won’t sound the same as another.

Quite good doesn't say anything. What's the point of reference; what does quite good mean.
The first automobile was very good compared to horses and carriage. Compared to the selfdriving cars of the future it means jack shit.

[wagtunes]

@beely

Yes, some synths (Korg Wavestation as a perfect example) are pretty easy to tell in isolation. If I played Ski Jam for anybody who has ever heard a Wavestation, yeah, they can identify that patch in 2 seconds. I owned a real Wavestation for over 25 years until I finally sold it. Nothing sounded like it. But that's the exception and not the rule. The DX7 is another one. At least as far as being able to tell it from, say, an Oberheim 4 voice. They have absolutely nothing in common.

If I went through all the soft synths I own, there are maybe a handful that are so distinctive that nothing comes close. Wolfgang Palm's stuff is like that. But even there, a lot of his stuff has so much overlap that it's difficult to tell whether you're using Wavemapper, Wavegenerator or Infinite Pro.

And like I said, workflow is so important to me that if I don't enjoy working with a synth it actually affects how it sounds to me. Believe me, I'm sure there are synths that I don't like that much that, if somebody played a piece for me with that synth in the mix, I'd probably say "Hey, that sounds great" and when they told me it was Synth X, I'd be like "Holy crap, really?"

Believe me, I get it. I know how influenced we become with our overall enjoyment of working with a synth that sometimes it sounds better to us simply because of that experience and may actually inspire us.

But that's where it ends. The guy on the other end of the speakers isn't going to notice what we're using.

[beely]

Yep, we're in agreement...

[fmr]

*However*, playing with their sound, character and behaviour, for some time, you *do* built up a better picture of why a synth sounds/feels/behaves better for you. Do an audio of a few minutes of noodling around on, say, the Arturia JP8m using a variety of features, vs the Roland Cloud JP8, and many many people would reliably be able to pick them, as you have enough information to make informed decisions.

I don't know what you mean by "playing with their sound". But I can post examples of the factory presets done with Arturia Jup-8 and Roland Jupiter-8, and defy you or anyone else to recognize which is which. This said, I agree that the Roland Jupiter-8 sounds "warmer" and "fuller" to me too, while the Arturia sounds more cut, dry and precise. Also, the Arturia Jup-8 doesn't sound so powerfull in the basses. Adding a saturation plug-in, we can achieve very much the same warmer sound, and something like a bass reinforcement plug-in will add that extra bass power, when needed. Bear in mind, though, what price you have to pay (in CPU cycles) to have the Roland Jupiter-8 perform like it is.

However, there is a thing called "psyche" which often tricks our judgement. When we have a bias towards something, we tend to always take what comes from it with disdain, and subjectively find imperfections, even when there isn't, objectively. The same, in poosite sense, happens when we have something, or someone, we favour. Unconsciusly, we tend to attribute positive qualities to what comes from that source, even when objectively, there is none. That's why the kind of assertions like "it's from A, then it's bullshit" or it's from B, it sounds great" without any kind of objective support, is something not to be considered, IMO. Several blind tests have been done, and often those bashers came out very bad.

Things should be judged for what they are. Undeniably, the Arturia synths can achieve a high level of accuracy when reproducing sounds done with their hardware counterparts, some more than others. Sonically speaking, the newer ones sound better than the older ones, IMO, with several degrees of difference. I know that the old ones are being worked on too, but not all at the same time. As you know, thigs were slow for several years, but are know speeding up. Still, it takes time to catch all of them, and there are also new things to be done, of course.

[Stefken]

This said, I agree that the Roland Jupiter-8 sounds "warmer" and "fuller" to me too, while the Arturia sounds more cut, dry and precise. Also, the Arturia Jup-8 doesn't sound so powerfull in the basses. Adding a saturation plug-in, we can achieve very much the same warmer sound, and something like a bass reinforcement plug-in will add that extra bass power, when needed.

For it to be a fair comparison, we have to compare the sound as it comes out of the box/synth.

But I agree that using saturation, you can pretty much resolve the issues with the 'thinner' sound of some of the Arturia plugins. I have a custom Ableton rack that I use for just that.

I know that the old ones are being worked on too, but not all at the same time. As you know, thigs were slow for several years, but are know speeding up. Still, it takes time to catch all of them, and there are also new things to be done, of course.

Do you know if these updates on their older emulations will be a free update for collection 6 owners or an upgrade to collection 7?

[fmr]

I know that the old ones are being worked on too, but not all at the same time. As you know, thigs were slow for several years, but are know speeding up. Still, it takes time to catch all of them, and there are also new things to be done, of course.

Do you know if these updates on their older emulations will be a free update for collection 6 owners or an upgrade to collection 7?

Most likely, these tings will just be issued in new versions of the collection (currently, they worked, and are working on the Matrix-12, for example, as well as Piano V, which was very much in need of an overhaul). I cannot say for sure which one will be next, but Arturia doesn't have the habit of release overhauled versions in between major revisions, so, most likely, any news will not come out before a future release. But I am just guessing, since I am not working for Arturia, so, take what I say with a grain of salt

[rezoneight]

Do an audio of a few minutes of noodling around on, say, the Arturia JP8m using a variety of features, vs the Roland Cloud JP8, and many many people would reliably be able to pick them, as you have enough information to make informed decisions.

I didn't mention it above but the JP8 was the first synth I was thinking about. I find it one of the least succesfull emulations of Arturia, certainly V2 .

The difference is pretty obvious.

Except of course to those who disagree with you. I remember specific examples of successful musicians who owned real JP8s that thought it was quite good. Not to mention each real Jupiter 8 won’t sound the same as another.

Quite good doesn't say anything. What's the point of reference; what does quite good mean.
The first automobile was very good compared to horses and carriage. Compared to the selfdriving cars of the future it means jack shit.

Please stop being obtuse. It should have been obvious the point of reference was their own Jupiter-8s. And the one thing that people keep ignoring for some reason when on this quest to find the Holy Grail is the fact that these old instruments sound different from one another not to mention just different from years of wear and tear. I've got a real Pro One, I know that it doesn't sound the same as the day it came off the factory floor. I also know that it doesn't sound exactly the same as other Pro Ones at this point. So while y'all are pulling your puds over "who is more accurate" and getting a great feel in the real world nobody gives a damn. As others have pointed out ad nauseum in a mix you're not gonna know.

This video (from 5 years ago) at 6:45 in. http://www.synthtopia.com/content/2012/ ... he-scenes/

It was good enough for Howard live after having three real ones break down.

[Stefken]

What I meant was: the standard towards rating a software emulation anno 2007 and the expectations were different than now. Computer hardware and software surely has changed in 10 years.

What was a pretty good emulation then, has to compete with far better emulations anno 2017 (that also consume a lot more cpu).

Talking about a comparison in isolation, not in the mix.

[beely]

It was good enough for Howard live after having three real ones break down.

Sure. Especially as HoJo was being endorsed by Arturia at the time for the JP8V...

(I'm a big HoJo fan, BTW)

Also, a live environment is pretty forgiving for accurate sound!

Anyhow, just because "famous guy #16" says something about an instrument doesn't really have much more weight than anyone else in absolute terms - I've known plenty of (brilliant, successful) musicians in their time that weren't really up on technical things, or product knowledge... they do music, rather than sweat over emulation A/B on internet forums!

[Stefken]

Anyhow, just because "famous guy #16" says something about an instrument doesn't really have much more weight than anyone else in absolute terms - I've known plenty of (brilliant, successful) musicians in their time that weren't really up on technical things, or product knowledge... they do music, rather than sweat over emulation A/B on internet forums!

When they made the oddity vst, they collected several arp Odyssey synths from well known musicians to measure them. Some stated that theirs had a 24 db filter. When they opened them up, it was the 12 db filter.

No worries, if sounddesign is not your thing, you don't have to hear the difference as far as i am concerned. But because a musician states this or that, does not make it true.

[wagtunes]

It was good enough for Howard live after having three real ones break down.

Sure. Especially as HoJo was being endorsed by Arturia at the time for the JP8V...

(I'm a big HoJo fan, BTW)

Also, a live environment is pretty forgiving for accurate sound!

Anyhow, just because "famous guy #16" says something about an instrument doesn't really have much more weight than anyone else in absolute terms - I've known plenty of (brilliant, successful) musicians in their time that weren't really up on technical things, or product knowledge... they do music, rather than sweat over emulation A/B on internet forums!

And what does that tell you?

I was actually going to bring this up but the guys out there in the business doing this for a living and making a hell of a lot more money than we'll ever see don't really care about anything other than "Is this going to give me the sound I want?"

I never in my life, going all the way back to 1977, bought a synth because of specs. If the guy at the store played something for me and I liked the way it sounded, I bought it. I do the same thing now. If I like the way soft synth X sounds, I don't care what it is or isn't trying to sound like. I buy it.

That's why I will probably never buy the new Korg Odyssey in the Legacy Collection. I owned an Odyssey back then thinking it would sound better than the AXXE that I had and when it didn't make me jump up and down for joy, I sold it. I still don't get the big fuss over it. To me, the Oberheim 4 voice sounded 100 times better, though I could never afford one.

But I digress.

[beely]

And what does that tell you?

It tells me the Arturia for HoJo (& Robbie) was "good enough" for the purposes he was using it for. It doesn't mean he thought it was the perfect emulation, or anything else.

[braj]

There is something to be said for the Jupiter 8V that it uses less cpu than some emulations. My guess is when it does get an upgrade, some will be upset when it uses more CPU and is therefore not as good for them personally.

[rezoneight]

It was good enough for Howard live after having three real ones break down.

Sure. Especially as HoJo was being endorsed by Arturia at the time for the JP8V...

(I'm a big HoJo fan, BTW)

Also, a live environment is pretty forgiving for accurate sound!

Anyhow, just because "famous guy #16" says something about an instrument doesn't really have much more weight than anyone else in absolute terms - I've known plenty of (brilliant, successful) musicians in their time that weren't really up on technical things, or product knowledge... they do music, rather than sweat over emulation A/B on internet forums!

I guess my point is (endorsed nonwithstanding) that the sound was good enough. Live environment or mixed instead of going and getting a 4th (or more) real machines they just went with the plugin. Nobody off the stage was going to know (so that endorsement doesnt mean much).

I don't trust Howard Jones' opinion just because he's Howard Jones. I trust his opinion because the guy knows the sound of the Jupter-8 having owned and used one for years on some very successful songs. And a guy who chose to use the plugin for a set of shows over trying to get the real thing yet again.

I simply don't understand the people who want to do these minuscule comparisons of plugins vs the hardware they're emulating. When two pieces of hardware aren't going to sound the same why should the plugin sound exactly the same? I suppose some people just want to see perfect. They're never gonna see that.

[rezoneight]

And what does that tell you?

It tells me the Arturia for HoJo (& Robbie) was "good enough" for the purposes he was using it for. It doesn't mean he thought it was the perfect emulation, or anything else.

And HoJo and Robbie probably don't give a hoot if its the perfect emulation