U-he The Cat

[Urs]

and what does that do? creates a wavetable, how novel...

Sometimes the novel part isn't the thing itself, but the quality in which it is done.

Also of course Hive's playback engine which can uniquely do "spectral morphing" in realtime between wavetable frames.

[AnX]

you can always learn to code and invent your own type of "new" synthesis

Really Dave ? That's the best you can do ?

you're the one spitting your dummy about emulating "crappy sounding synths"

nobody seems to be doing anything new or innovative, so the only solution for you would be to make all your own gear

i guess you wont be testing the next batch of synths Rich throws out, as they fit into your "crap sounding hardware" emulation catagory...

Maybe you need to find a new hobby.

I've got plenty to keep me busy, thanks

[AnX]

and what does that do? creates a wavetable, how novel...

Sometimes the novel part isn't the thing itself, but the quality in which it is done.

Also of course Hive's playback engine which can uniquely do "spectral morphing" in realtime between wavetable frames.

yes, but its still a wavetable, and Tek and said many times how he is "bored" of that sound, so no idea why he brought up that poor example, as he has no interest in it (you can find those speeches here and at SA)

Quality is always good, which is why ppl buy quality emulations of quality hardware, but Tek doesn't like that, he want "new synthesis"

[pdxindy]

Some of us who lived through the era don't see much point in looking back. Been there, done that, looking to do something different.

Some of us still like to play a guitar even though it is old and outdated.

[pdxindy]

No telling what the future could hold if we'd stop looking at the past. There might just be a new form of synthesis right around the corner if someone puts the time and research in but we're too busy trying to emulate synths that have been surpassed years ago.

I'd like to see more physical modeling synths... but besides that, I feel little interest in new forms of synthesis. What we have available now already exceeds most peoples capability to make full use of.

[FapFilter]

I'm not Teksonik, but what i meant in my last post was that i'd rather take an Ace 2 or another nice instrument with it's own identity that happens to sound like very cool existing synths.
Yesterday i looked the Voyetra up for the first time on Youtube because of this thread.
It seems to sound really good, but so do many other synths. Also: is this user interface really that desirable over something like Massive, or other well thought out softsynth paradigms?
And wouldn't other features like more and easier modulation possibilites, hard/softsync, morphable oscillators, more waveforms, or improved/expanded envelopes behaviour the the respective originals might lack, combined with an already mentioned more straight forward user interface be more beneficial to musicians than slavishly trying to copy something just to be able to call it an emulation?
This doesn't mean that Urs, or other developers should stop thriving to make their stuff sound like awesome existing hard- or software instruments within their respective original parameter ranges, but why stop there and not (vastly) improve upon them, thus making them completely new instruments on their own, that just happen to sound eerily close to a Jupiter, Prophet, or a Cat/Voyetra in this case if one desires so.

[pdxindy]

but why stop there and not (vastly) improve upon them, thus making them completely new instruments on their own, that just happen to sound eerily close to a Jupiter, Prophet, or a Cat/Voyetra in this case if one desires so.

It's not possible to vastly improve upon RePro... What a gorgeous sounding synth it is and with lots of big wide sweet spots and so easy to work with.

[EvilDragon]

Sure is. Add the Rev 2 chip emulations (SSM) which do sound even better than Curtis chips from Rev 3. Add highpass filter mode across all the different filter chip options on the Tweak panel, and LFO triggering the envelopes (so that we can finally fully convert Pro-53 patches to Repro-5).

[elnn]

Anyone who whines about synths not being novel enough doesn’t put enough effort to program a synth in an interesting way and expects the synth engine to do the whole work for them to sound “new” and “cool”. And then they find that novel engine and make that exact same old thing they’ve always been doing with a few harmonics shifted here and there.
It takes years of music school to become at least somewhat proficient at your instrument. Spend that amount of quality time with a synth and maybe then your complaints might have any weight. Otherwise it’s just teenagery.

Take any U-he synth, take a few effects processors and you can do stuff you’ve never imagined. Try FM and a formant shifter, you’d be surprised.

There are also lots of extreme and ‘new’ synths. They’re mostly an effin bitch to control and just don’t give musical results.
Also, innovations like new forms of synthesis require a completely different mindset. It just goes in the opposite direction from making a usable musical instrument. It requires different research and different types of thinking. It’s not stuff of engineering or designing. And it takes years which might turn out to not be at all profitable. So you have to have a drive for this from the start. Urs doesn’t do that, so take a hint that he might just not be interested in that. His art form is in a different place and he’s really one of the absolute best in this art. It’s his and his team’s vision and all that we can do is help him bring the best of it and not demand that it fits ours.

[FapFilter]

True, but this also means that we don't need any new instruments at all anymore. Be it something new or just emulations of something very old.
In fact i'm not looking for new stuff at all as i am really perfectly happy with what i have, but if i was for something new to my arsenal, i would still prefer a synth that seems more fluid to program than something with an interface of a Voyetra (which might still be actually not that bad to program as i only had a very quick glance on it on a Youtube vid, but is it really the best interface you could dream of?)
I also don't care for big or famous names or brands. An instrument (or effect) either sounds good to me and is a joy to program, or not.
Also, stuff like optional filter bypass for any of the oscillators, or filters that actually fully open up if desired so, a few more waveforms for the oscillators and LFOs (maybe even morphable as opposed to just switchable), etc. aren't exactly rocket science that would unnecessarily overcomplicate something into an untamable übersynth.

Of course existing instruments are perfectly fine and of course can yield totally awesome results, but at least regarding synthetic instruments i can't see the benefit of something beeing as true as possible to something that already exists when you can have equally great sounding stuff in their own right that either don't try to mimic other synths at all, or just more or less loosely base their sounds or features on something very desireable and disregard that you have to dial in comparable filter cutoff or envelope settings on one synth at 12 o' clock, while it takes 1, 2, 3, or 10 o' clock on other synths.

[Telematix]

Personally I would pay a decent amount for Diva upgrade with new osc and filter models.

[elnn]

But it’s all a design choice. You have to make sacrifices and each developer aims for balance individually. Yes, you can add a feature, but then you can also add another and yet another until all that’s left is to open it like a Reaktor or Max instrument. You can always add, but when to stop is the important question. You might think differently than their team, your opinion might even be better rounded, but in the end, it’s not you who is making the decisions and that’s really the eternal state of things if you’re not the developer or a shareholder.

I agree that sometimes an instrument is so lovely in every way that you might want just these few features more instead of using another one which has that feature. And it sucks that it’s them who decide on whether they listen to you or not. But think about it – each person in their team has their whole lives to manage, their own priorities and plans and they need to weigh a lot and they don’t have unlimited time or resources. They had a project which they took up and their MO was to keep true to what they’ve decided. Of course they mihht have decided differently, they might some day, but they simply didn’t and it’s entirely their call. I agree completely that making digital instruments one should take advantage of the malleability of the medium, that’s why I don’t use Repro, but I just put my attention into other synths and that’s all that I or you can do in this situation. There’s of course nothing wrong with asking, nothing wrong with argumentation, but in the end, they just don’t matter if the team doesn’t have the same opinion. They worked a lot making what they’ve made and they did an excellent job and critique is always well as well, but sometimes it digs too far from the idea that the team wanted to realize.

As for new instruments – it’s not a collective, but an individual choice to embark on that really bumpy and possibly disappointing journey of making a new instrument. It requires a very strong and lucid vision and simply the desire to do that. Not everyone does, you can’t demand it that they make a leap of faith where they are not ready or at all interested in making it. If you have an idea and are interested in it and really interested, then, really, you can just take up programming and do it. It will take some years, but you’ll be boss and maybe the next big thing in synthesis. Or if you have enough money, you can hire someone to make it for you. But until then, it’s just empty demands that others give you something you don’t have (maybe no one has) while you yourself are not ready to put in the work to do yourself.

[glokraw]

True, but this also means that we don't need any new instruments at all anymore. Be it something new or just emulations of something very old.

I am so sated with the excellent presets of the few dozen
products I regularly use, that buying more before having
adequately previewed and experimented with what I have,
would be the action of a near-raving fan, more than
that of someone sensing a need. But I _AM_ a fan
so I'll buy the upgrades, and consider new products that could add
to the already future-proof stash, which itself seems to magically grow
whenever I actually learn or discover something musical.


or on a really good day,

[cowudders]

Sure is. Add the Rev 2 chip emulations (SSM) which do sound even better than Curtis chips from Rev 3. Add highpass filter mode across all the different filter chip options on the Tweak panel, and LFO triggering the envelopes (so that we can finally fully convert Pro-53 patches to Repro-5).

A SSM option for Repro-5 would be awesome!
Is this the only difference between the Rev3 and Rev2?
U-he should charge for such an update.

[david.beholder]

Let me remind some people that Jamaican producers used the same gear as US producers but they made Reggae. Kraftwerk and Tangerine Dream used similar synthesizers you can't confuse them.
And all analog, wavetable, whatever synths are the same at some extent but some can produce unique music/magic/goosebumps with them and some couldn't.
Are you good producer?