UVI USQ-1

[Aloysius]

[Ingonator]

Is the filter modelled? Used to really piss me off that it was impossible to do a filter sweep the slider, the filter only changed with every note on message. I'm not much into sampled synths either though.

I have not used this yet but my guess is that they use the filters included in Falcon and UVI Workstation (which both use the same synth engines). The Xpander filter in Falcon might be used for this.

Just started checking in Falcon and the filter used in USQ-1 indeed is the Xpander multimode filter of Falcon.

As the 4-Pole Lowpass filter in the CEM3379 chip of the ESQ-1 seems to be somehow close (while not similar) to that in the CEM3372 chip used in Xpander/Matrix-12 this should be the closest approach of the filters included in Falcon.
Of course the complex and versatile multimode filter (15 filter modes !!) of the Xander/Matrix-12 is hardly comparable to a "simple" and/or single Lowpass filter like used in the ESQ-1, even if the filter chips used in those are somehow close.

Of course when used in Falcon you could create a much more complex synth from USQ-1 than what is possible with it by default.

[Teksonik]

Yes, that's what all the UVI stuff is - a bunch of well sampled patches from the source synth/s

My problem with their VFX module is that the patches they sampled do not capture the soul and character of the original synth.

In this case unless they sampled the ESQ-1's base waveforms and allow the exact level of programming as the hardware then it's just a snapshot of the synth and not a proper emulation. There are probably legal reasons why the waveforms and factory patches can't be sampled but if the patches they created to sample don't do the synth justice then neither will their plugin. Kind of like if you sampled a DX7 and didn't include the Tine Piano or Tubular bell sounds etc........

[SLiC]

Yes, that's what all the UVI stuff is - a bunch of well sampled patches from the source synth/s

My problem with their VFX module is that the patches they sampled do not capture the soul and character of the original synth.

In this case unless they sampled the ESQ-1's base waveforms and allow the exact level of programming as the hardware then it's just a snapshot of the synth and not a proper emulation. There are probably legal reasons why the waveforms and factory patches can't be sampled but if the patches they created to sample don't do the synth justice then neither will their plugin. Kind of like if you sampled a DX7 and didn't include the Tine Piano or Tubular bell sounds etc........

Possibly if an exact reproduction is what you want (Korg and Roland have done their ROMS for their wave based synths), but I (and probably 99% of users here) have never heard a real ESQ1 and are not realy trying to emulate it realistically. This is (currently) a sub 50 buck synth with a nice analogue filter, superb effects and a really good arp/sequencer....overall it sounds great and adds more stuff to mange in Falcon, more than happy for the price.

[Teksonik]

but I (and probably 99% of users here) have never heard a real ESQ1 and are not realy trying to emulate it realistically.

I think many people have heard, owned, or still own an ESQ-1. It was one of the most widely owned synths of the time.

Anyway you can't say "here's a plugin based on the ESQ-1" and not capture the essence of the ESQ.

This is (currently) a sub 50 buck synth with a nice analogue filter, superb effects and a really good arp/sequencer....overall it sounds great and adds more stuff to mange in Falcon, more than happy for the price.

I'm not commenting on whether it sounds good or not but whether it sounds enough like the ESQ-1 I used to own to make it worth buying for nostalgic reasons. I have heard nothing in the demos yet that makes me want to buy it.....

[murnau]

Same here that's why i prefer a real emulation over pro sampled stuff be it from UVI or whoever. It's simply more fun and make more sense in the long run (imo) to have an accurate emulation then to have a great sounding sampled something which can only be a snapshot in the end.

[beely]

then it's just a snapshot of the synth and not a proper emulation.

This is exactly what all these UVI instruments are.
None of them are emulations, they are snapshots with a nice gui and some customisation options.

[maserman]

http://www.buchty.net/ensoniq/index.html#sq8l

[SLiC]

but I (and probably 99% of users here) have never heard a real ESQ1 and are not realy trying to emulate it realistically.

I think many people have heard, owned, or still own an ESQ-1. It was one of the most widely owned synths of the time.

Anyway you can't say "here's a plugin based on the ESQ-1" and not capture the essence of the ESQ.

This is (currently) a sub 50 buck synth with a nice analogue filter, superb effects and a really good arp/sequencer....overall it sounds great and adds more stuff to mange in Falcon, more than happy for the price.

I'm not commenting on whether it sounds good or not but whether it sounds enough like the ESQ-1 I used to own to make it worth buying for nostalgic reasons. I have heard nothing in the demos yet that makes me want to buy it.....

It may have been widely owned at the time (I think it was only sold for a couple of years before all the 'workstations' came out) but that was 1985, so you would probably have to be in your 50's now to have had one at the time....My first synth was the 'brand new' Yamaha SY22 (you had to be old enough to be working to afford a synth!)

Its definately not a copy, clone or even attempt to be much like thne oprigonal (evenm according to UVI's own marketing) but iut does sound good and is good value (especially if you own Falcon) IMHO.

[Stefken]

FWIW i currently got both a real ESQ-1 and the free SQ8L plugin (with jBridge to use it as 64-bit) here.

Do you prefer the SQ8L (bridging seems to work) or the USQ1?
Or what do you see as the added benefit of the USQ1 as you already have an emulation which is more flexible then uvi's approach?

[Saukar30]

Is the filter modelled? Used to really piss me off that it was impossible to do a filter sweep the slider, the filter only changed with every note on message. I'm not much into sampled synths either though.

I have not used this yet but my guess is that they use the filters included in Falcon and UVI Workstation (which both use the same synth engines). The Xpander filter in Falcon might be used for this.

Just started checking in Falcon and the filter used in USQ-1 indeed is the Xpander multimode filter of Falcon.

As the 4-Pole Lowpass filter in the CEM3379 chip of the ESQ-1 seems to be somehow close (while not similar) to that in the CEM3372 chip used in Xpander/Matrix-12 this should be the closest approach of the filters included in Falcon.
Of course the complex and versatile multimode filter (15 filter modes !!) of the Xander/Matrix-12 is hardly comparable to a "simple" and/or single Lowpass filter like used in the ESQ-1, even if the filter chips used in those are somehow close.

Of course when used in Falcon you could create a much more complex synth from USQ-1 than what is possible with it by default.

Hey Ignotator. How are the sounds of the oscillators by themselves?

I see that there are 268 waves/layers to choose from for the oscillator choices. Towards the end are the original waveforms used in the synth (according to the manual). Is the sound reminiscent of the original hardware without the effects & modulations?

If they are as warm & crunchy as the SQ then I might give it a go.

[Ingonator]

Is the filter modelled? Used to really piss me off that it was impossible to do a filter sweep the slider, the filter only changed with every note on message. I'm not much into sampled synths either though.

I have not used this yet but my guess is that they use the filters included in Falcon and UVI Workstation (which both use the same synth engines). The Xpander filter in Falcon might be used for this.

Just started checking in Falcon and the filter used in USQ-1 indeed is the Xpander multimode filter of Falcon.

As the 4-Pole Lowpass filter in the CEM3379 chip of the ESQ-1 seems to be somehow close (while not similar) to that in the CEM3372 chip used in Xpander/Matrix-12 this should be the closest approach of the filters included in Falcon.
Of course the complex and versatile multimode filter (15 filter modes !!) of the Xander/Matrix-12 is hardly comparable to a "simple" and/or single Lowpass filter like used in the ESQ-1, even if the filter chips used in those are somehow close.

Of course when used in Falcon you could create a much more complex synth from USQ-1 than what is possible with it by default.

Hey Ignotator. How are the sounds of the oscillators by themselves?

I see that there are 268 waves/layers to choose from for the oscillator choices. Towards the end are the original waveforms used in the synth (according to the manual). Is the sound reminiscent of the original hardware without the effects & modulations?

If they are as warm & crunchy as the SQ then I might give it a go.

Hi,

i have just started using USQ-1 and have not set up my ESQ-1 currently but i want to try to do a comparison soon.

Anyway as mentioned earlier USQ-1 seems to be nice "as is" while it is NOT even remotely possible to program patches from scratch in a similar way as in the original hardware while there are also features that were not included with the real thing.
The real ESQ-1 had a complex synth engine with 3 Oscs, 32 waveforms per Osc, Osc Sync, AM/Ringmod, a real analog 4-pole Lowpass filter, 4 multistage envelopes (4 levels and 4 times), 3 LFOs, a dedicated Amp for each Osc (so you can use a dedicated Amp enveleop for each one) and quite powerful mod routings (including aftertouch as a mod source while the ESQ-1 keyboard itself had no built-in aftertouch).

Still from what i have checked so far the "essence" of the ESQ-1 seems to be there so this does not seem to just sound like just a random synth that is not related to the sound of an ESQ-1.

Like with other sample libraries and also some modeled emulations (e.g. Arturia plugins and Tone2 Saurus) i added Waves OneKnob Phatter to boost the low end which could improve the overall sound quite a lot. On the other hand an amount of 50% or less is alraedy enough in Waves OneKnob Phatter which means that the low end of the original USQ-1 is not too bad. With several other sample libraries and synths where i used it i had to use a bigger amount to get a comparable bass boost.

When used within Falcon you could make the synth engine of USQ-1 more complex with additional modulations, filters, effects etc.
What is not possible to emulate from the real thing within Falcon is the Osc Sync and AM/Ringmod. You could only use that with samples that were based on using those features.

[Ingonator]

I see that there are 268 waves/layers to choose from for the oscillator choices. Towards the end are the original waveforms used in the synth (according to the manual).

I could confirm that the last 32 samples in the drop-down menu are the 32 original Osc waveforms.


UPDATE:
I just tried to browse through the "raw" samples in the "wave selection" using a single layer without effects, additional modulation etc. by the USQ-1 engine. That raw sound then more or less corresponds to how the patches sounded at the real ESQ-1 while they were created there.

I have to say that i am quite impressed by those raw sounds, even more when some bass boosting with an external plugin (here it is Waves OneKnob Phatter) is added.

Independent of a direct 1:1 comparison the raw samples for sure sound like a real ESQ-1 to me.
In the past I had listened to multiple modeled plugins where IMO the raw output sounded worse than this.

The samples also include some where Osc Sync was used in a more or less "typical" way (like in fully analog synths).

[zerocrossing]

Is the filter modelled? Used to really piss me off that it was impossible to do a filter sweep the slider, the filter only changed with every note on message. I'm not much into sampled synths either though.

I have not used this yet but my guess is that they use the filters included in Falcon and UVI Workstation (which both use the same synth engines). The Xpander filter in Falcon might be used for this.

Just started checking in Falcon and the filter used in USQ-1 indeed is the Xpander multimode filter of Falcon.

As the 4-Pole Lowpass filter in the CEM3379 chip of the ESQ-1 seems to be somehow close (while not similar) to that in the CEM3372 chip used in Xpander/Matrix-12 this should be the closest approach of the filters included in Falcon.
Of course the complex and versatile multimode filter (15 filter modes !!) of the Xander/Matrix-12 is hardly comparable to a "simple" and/or single Lowpass filter like used in the ESQ-1, even if the filter chips used in those are somehow close.

Of course when used in Falcon you could create a much more complex synth from USQ-1 than what is possible with it by default.

Except no ring mod or oscillator sync on the wavetables.

The demos sound very good, but I’m done with monster sample collections to get me something that was probably 512k of ROM. I’ve already got their Waverunner collection and I’m good.

[Aloysius]

If I din't own this, I'd buy it. It's a very nice sounding Library.