Korg updates its Legacy Collection with a new Arp Odyssey emulation

[Stefken]

If you dial up the same patch on both (the hardware and GUI look the same) the resulting sound is very different...the VST may give the flavour of an ARP, but It doesn’t give the thundering sound of the (reproduced) hardware.

I find it a lot more interesting to see if you can get (quite) the same sound/flavour with the vst, than expecting if you dial in the same settings, that you get the same exact sound.

The vst also has unison which allows for quite some thunder...

[SLiC]

If you dial up the same patch on both (the hardware and GUI look the same) the resulting sound is very different...the VST may give the flavour of an ARP, but It doesn’t give the thundering sound of the (reproduced) hardware.

I find it a lot more interesting to see if you can get (quite) the same sound/flavour with the vst, than expecting if you dial in the same settings, that you get the same exact sound.

The vst also has unison which allows for quite some thunder...

Yes, you can get some great sounds from the VST with unison and obviusly its poly! But as a 1:1 'emulation', not so much- fun and musically very usable (and that's all that matters to me, I have it when I travel on my MS surface....if the VST works on a song, the hardware will probably alos work and in some cases even sound better!)

[BlackWinny]

If you dial up the same patch on both (the hardware and GUI look the same) the resulting sound is very different...the VST may give the flavour of an ARP, but It doesn’t give the thundering sound of the (reproduced) hardware.

I find it a lot more interesting to see if you can get (quite) the same sound/flavour with the vst, than expecting if you dial in the same settings, that you get the same exact sound.

The vst also has unison which allows for quite some thunder...

Yes, you can get some great sounds from the VST with unison and obviusly its poly! But as a 1:1 'emulation', not so much- fun and musically very usable (and that's all that matters to me, I have it when I travel on my MS surface....if the VST works on a song, the hardware will probably alos work and in some cases even sound better!)

If I wanted a perfect 1:1 emulation with such exigence, I would simply purchase the true hardware sold more than a thousand dollars. For $50/$100 I have a quite correct software emulation and I don't complaint.

[ChamomileShark]

Before you start slandering somebody, perhaps educate yourself on how patch memory is actually done on a synthesizer.

I know exactly how patch memory is done on a synthesizer

Explain, then, instead of merely claiming to know.

I think maybe you need to understand where and why you use AD/DA converters.

Then explain that.

All you need to do is digitally store/retrieve values read from the analogue circuitry.

If you cant convert the analogue voltage into a digital value, you cant store it digitally.
If you cant convert the digital value into an analogue voltage, then whatever you're storing isnt going to control the hardware.

You need to do both of these things to have patch memory, so would you like to clarify what sort of electronic devices are used for the two processes I highlighted?

Just out of curiosity, what about the "preset" system of the CS80 - was that completely analogue? It had a minaturised version of the layout - maybe that one was totally analogue? And maybe the preset manager for the SEM based polysynths. I wonder how the prestopatch presets worked on the EMS.

Just curious - I'm sure you are right about the more familiar patch memories on synths from the Prophet 5 onwards.

[whyterabbyt]

Just out of curiosity, what about the "preset" system of the CS80 - was that completely analogue? It had a minaturised version of the layout - maybe that one was totally analogue?

I believe so; basically if the physical controls/connections are duplicated, you can switch between them.

And maybe the preset manager for the SEM based polysynths.

That one may actually be digital.
https://patents.justia.com/patent/4185531

I wonder how the prestopatch presets worked on the EMS.

AFAIK, it basically replicated a duplicate of the patchbay matrix connections with hardwired resistors....

Just curious - I'm sure you are right about the more familiar patch memories on synths from the Prophet 5 onwards.

Yeah, it digital storage BONES was explicitly making claims about.

[ChamomileShark]

ok thanks for that - the patent for the Obie programmer was 1977 which fits..

[whyterabbyt]

ok thanks for that - the patent for the Obie programmer was 1977 which fits..

Ive just found the schematics; from the block diagram it doesnt look like it used a microprocessor, seems to have implemented the storage to/from CMOS memory with discrete logic between the ADC/DAC stages.

www.synthfool.com/docs/Oberheim/oberheim4and8voice/

[BONES]

Well then, by all means, school us, BONES. By not demonstrating your claimed knowledge, you're accomplishing nothing other than reinforcing our impression of your behavior as hostile, insecure, and ignorant.

Of course I don't need to prove myself to you but I am all for sharing information. A digital patch memory simply needs to read off the analogue values of every parameter - the rheostat that drives filter cutoff is not part of the signal path. Then you store them and send them back out when the stored patch is loaded. If an analogue instrument can respond to MIDI, and most modern ones can, the digital hooks are already in place to store all the values. And yes, that requires signal conversion but the DAC you use for that costs next to nothing because it's only got to read a single fixed value, not reproduce detailed audio at high sampling rates. A whole set-up for this wouldn't add $20 to the overall cost of even the most complex analogue machine.

And you can go much further, as clever companies like Elektron do and Korg have done with their own analogue synths, and use digital wherever it makes sense to. e.g. a digital LFO only modulates the values of the analogue circuit, the actual signal remains pure analogue. Another example is a DCO and a VCO - both output a pure analogue signal, it's just that the DCO has more rigid control (no unwanted drift) and allows you to do more with it than a VCO.

To slavishly refuse to use use digital where it makes no difference is stupid, especially when analogue modelling is such a precise science these days and the extra cost in negligible. It would be trivial to make an Odyssey that is 100% true to the original's sound and character but also has all the modern, digital features that we've become used to. Id' have bought an Odyssey in a heartbeat if it had a patch memory. Without it, it's just an expensive toy with very limited use. Rick Wakeman didn't have a hundred keyboards on stage because of a bad case of GAS, he had to have all of those because each one only played one patch. What sort of idiot wants to have their hands tied like that today?

I have both the Korg arp hardware and their VST. I have never had an origonal so can’t comment on which sounds more like the origonal, but to my ears the hardware sounds far better than the VST, the raw oscillator sounds when beating and the filter when near resonance sound compliantly different.

Any chance you can throw up a couple of side-by-side demos? I'd be very keen to hear the difference.

The vst also has unison which allows for quite some thunder...

Exactly! Hard to imagine the hardware could overpower that and I use Unison on every patch.

Just out of curiosity, what about the "preset" system of the CS80 - was that completely analogue? It had a minaturised version of the layout - maybe that one was totally analogue?

Yes, it used "micropotentiometers" to store patches. I have no idea how that worked but it sounds like it would have been expensive to implement.

[whyterabbyt]

Of course I don't need to prove myself to you

No, but you were being challenged to prove your claims.

but I am all for sharing information.

'Im right, you're an idiot' doesnt actually count as information.

A digital patch memory simply needs to read off the analogue values of every parameter - the rheostat that drives filter cutoff is not part of the signal path. Then you store them and send them back out when the stored patch is loaded.

'all you need to do', 'you simply do the stuff', 'just send it back'

Seems like you're trying very hard to avoid sharing information you claimed to know better than other people here.

But we all know what it does. You were being asked for an explanation of how it does it, given that you'd insisted it didnt use ADCs or DACs. 'reads off' and 'sends back' arent information, they're handwaving.

If an analogue instrument can respond to MIDI, and most modern ones can, the digital hooks are already in place to store all the values.

Not necessarily.
Notwisthstanding the fact that that handwaves away a lot of the complexity of retrofitting that onto an existing circuit, which was the specific context this was in....

the rheostat that drives filter cutoff is not part of the signal path.

In the circuits you're talking about retrofitting, this is patently false. So an extensive redesign would be required.
By the way, noone uses rheostats, its not the 50's. Potentiometers.

Its good to see that you're admitting you were wrong though. Compare and contrast....

You're an idiot. Why would you need to do any AD/DA conversion just to have a patch memory?

yes, that requires signal conversion but the DAC you use for that

Hmmm.

costs next to nothing because it's only got to read a single fixed value, not reproduce detailed audio at high sampling rates. A whole set-up for this wouldn't add $20 to the overall cost of even the most complex analogue machine.

Goalpost shift attempted. Your original claim was basically that it was trivial, not that the parts wouldnt cost much.

The cost of the parts is irrelevant. And redesigning the circuit so that the pots are no longer in the circuit isnt trivial.

So in short; fuzzy handwaving, no proper explanation of how it works, (presumably because you dont want to admit you were wrong about the ADC/DAC requirement), and a complete strawman over cost, which has nothing to do with the actual topic of adding patch memory to a legacy analogue synth.

[Jace-BeOS]

Basically "it doesn't need an AD/DA conversion" has been reframed as "it needs a 'minimal amount' of DA/AD conversion"... while trolling with "clever" bold text formatting to repeatedly pull the word "anal" out of the word "analog".

Back-pedaling while claiming to be dishing out facts, AND still handing out childish abuse.

Trolling Achievement Unlocked.

Seriously, BONES, just admit that you called people idiots for no good reason, apologize, and move on.

[Teksonik]

Interesting reads:

https://electronics.stackexchange.com/q ... ynthesizer

https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-implem ... ynthesizer

Diagram-1.png

[fmr]

Interesting reads:

https://electronics.stackexchange.com/q ... ynthesizer

https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-implem ... ynthesizer

Diagram-1.png

Thanks At least someone is "informing" instead of just exchanging insults

[whyterabbyt]

Interesting reads:

Diagram-1.png

That diagram is straight from the Oberheim patent I linked to earlier.

[Teksonik]

And your point is ? I haven't read every post in the 103 pages.

That diagram is straight from the link I posted earlier.

https://electronics.stackexchange.com/q ... ynthesizer

[EnGee]

Korg Is busy with Switch now! And we are waiting for GUI enhancements, my arse!!