Any new classic synth emus on the horizon? Moog, Arp, Obie?

VST, AU, AAX, CLAP, etc. Plugin Virtual Instruments Discussion
Post Reply New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

A 2600 from Arturia, I'm not sure I would take it... but from GForce or XILS or U-He indeed yes! Without any hesitation !
Build your life everyday as if you would live for a thousand years. Marvel at the Life everyday as if you would die tomorrow.
I'm now severely diseased since September 2018.

Post

BlackWinny wrote: Mon Nov 18, 2019 10:43 pm Xavier Oudin (Xils) could be also another challenger. And perhaps he could ask Jean-Michel Jarre (who uses Syn'X) to lend him his 2600 to work quietly on it all the time needed. It would be a great collaboration, even if JMJ's role were limited to that loan.
Yes!

Post

BlackWinny wrote: Mon Nov 18, 2019 10:45 pm A 2600 from Arturia, I'm not sure I would take it... but from GForce or XILS or U-He indeed yes! Without any hesitation !
Arturia already has a 2600. The 2600 V (I think it is on 3 now). GForce or XILS doing one, however, would be phenomenal. They have done well with their stuff...even the sampled stuff from GForce sounds good.

Post

on a very similar topic, just in case

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=524698

Post

BlackWinny wrote: Mon Nov 18, 2019 10:45 pm A 2600 from Arturia, I'm not sure I would take it... but from GForce or XILS or U-He indeed yes! Without any hesitation !
Kinda odd, considering that Arturias ARP 2600 was made by Xavier Oudin, a.k.a. XILS-lab.

And as to accuracy; lets not forget that there were several revisions of the ARP 2600. They had different oscillators, different filters, etc. Obviously Xavier and Jim did not emulate the same one, so comparing the two as though there was only one ARP 2600 makes no sense. They are different, but for a reason.

Post

ENV1 wrote: Tue Nov 19, 2019 11:15 am
BlackWinny wrote: Mon Nov 18, 2019 10:45 pm A 2600 from Arturia, I'm not sure I would take it... but from GForce or XILS or U-He indeed yes! Without any hesitation !
Kinda odd, considering that Arturias ARP 2600 was made by Xavier Oudin, a.k.a. XILS-lab.

And as to accuracy; lets not forget that there were several revisions of the ARP 2600. They had different oscillators, different filters, etc. Obviously Xavier and Jim did not emulate the same one, so comparing the two as though there was only one ARP 2600 makes no sense. They are different, but for a reason.
I know that every copy of an analog synth has its own sound a bit different than the sound of another copy of the same synth. I can even say (and you know of course) that a copy doesn't have exactly the same sound as itself at another moment, depending the heat, depending its age, etc.

Then it is obvious that the emulation of two different copies of a same model will give two different results.

It's not the point.

I have hardware analog synths since my first one in 1977. We are not noobs, you and me. Please remember that it's been decades and decades I'm not a noob any more.

And the fact that Xavier made the Arturia emulation years and years ago when he was engineer at Arturia doesn't imply that he will make the same today being now THE BOSS of himself.

The Arturia emulations have pretty good sound. Indeed. But the choice between several software emulations of a same model is not made only by the sound they produce. There are many other criteria, which are important too in the choice between several emulations and between several developers. The reactivity to reply to the users, the reactivity to solve the bugs, the choice between different types of protection, the size of the GUIs, the timeline, etc. It is obvious that what offers Xavier and the way he manages his production and his relations with his users, is totally different than what offers and does Arturia and than what Arturia has always offered and done for years. And that's why I said that I would probably not take a 2600 emulation from Arturia while I would without any hesitation take one from Xavier (or from U-He or from GForce).

:neutral:
Build your life everyday as if you would live for a thousand years. Marvel at the Life everyday as if you would die tomorrow.
I'm now severely diseased since September 2018.

Post

BlackWinny wrote: Tue Nov 19, 2019 4:11 pm
ENV1 wrote: Tue Nov 19, 2019 11:15 am
BlackWinny wrote: Mon Nov 18, 2019 10:45 pm A 2600 from Arturia, I'm not sure I would take it... but from GForce or XILS or U-He indeed yes! Without any hesitation !
Kinda odd, considering that Arturias ARP 2600 was made by Xavier Oudin, a.k.a. XILS-lab.

And as to accuracy; lets not forget that there were several revisions of the ARP 2600. They had different oscillators, different filters, etc. Obviously Xavier and Jim did not emulate the same one, so comparing the two as though there was only one ARP 2600 makes no sense. They are different, but for a reason.
I know that every copy of an analog synth has its own sound a bit different than the sound of another copy of the same synth. I can even say (and you know of course) that a copy doesn't have exactly the same sound as itself at another moment, depending the heat, depending its age, etc.

Then it is obvious that the emulation of two different copies of a same model will give two different results.

It's not the point.

I have hardware analog synths since my first one in 1977. We are not noobs, you and me. Please remember that it's been decades and decades I'm not a noob any more.

And the fact that Xavier made the Arturia emulation years and years ago when he was engineer at Arturia doesn't imply that he will make the same today being now THE BOSS of himself.

The Arturia emulations have pretty good sound. Indeed. But the choice between several software emulations of a same model is not made only by the sound they produce. There are many other criteria, which are important too in the choice between several emulations and between several developers. The reactivity to reply to the users, the reactivity to solve the bugs, the choice between different types of protection, the size of the GUIs, the timeline, etc. It is obvious that what offers Xavier and the way he manages his production and his relations with his users, is totally different than what offers and does Arturia and than what Arturia has always offered and done for years. And that's why I said that I would probably not take a 2600 emulation from Arturia while I would without any hesitation take one from Xavier (or from U-He or from GForce).

:neutral:
Agreed

Post

BlackWinny wrote: I know that every copy of an analog synth has its own sound a bit different than the sound of another copy of the same synth.

Then it is obvious that the emulation of two different copies of a same model will give two different results.

It's not the point.
Youre right, its not, so please listen more carefully.

What i was saying was that the ARP 2600, i.e. the hardware, has undergone several substantial revisions, and that it is obvious that Xavier and Jim did not emulate the same revision. In other words i was not talking about minute differences between units of the same revision, i was talking about substantial differences between different revisions, namely oscillator and filter modules, (among other stuff), i.e. the two very parts that most define the sound of a synthesizer.

For more info i will just leave this link.

http://www.vintagesynth.com/arp/arp.php

Scroll down to read up on the changes from rev to rev and a chart of what rev used what components.

Post

ENV1 wrote: Tue Nov 19, 2019 5:53 pm
BlackWinny wrote: I know that every copy of an analog synth has its own sound a bit different than the sound of another copy of the same synth.

Then it is obvious that the emulation of two different copies of a same model will give two different results.

It's not the point.
Youre right, its not, so please listen more carefully.

What i was saying was that the ARP 2600, i.e. the hardware, has undergone several substantial revisions, and that it is obvious that Xavier and Jim did not emulate the same revision. In other words i was not talking about minute differences between units of the same revision, i was talking about substantial differences between different revisions, namely oscillator and filter modules, (among other stuff), i.e. the two very parts that most define the sound of a synthesizer.

For more info i will just leave this link.

http://www.vintagesynth.com/arp/arp.php

Scroll down to read up on the changes from rev to rev and a chart of what rev used what components.
We know all that, ENV1. We know all that.
And it is obvious (as you wrote, by the way). It is an evidence, exactly as the xyz model of an xyz old synth is never necessarily the same revision which is emulated by two different developers. What was my point when I wrote my message was not in the differences between models nor even between revisions... but between developers of software emulations.
So when in your reply you wrote that my message had no sense, it was very surprising, because you wrote that for something I didn't even touched on. To recall you :
ENV1 wrote: Tue Nov 19, 2019 11:15 am
BlackWinny wrote: Mon Nov 18, 2019 10:45 pm A 2600 from Arturia, I'm not sure I would take it... but from GForce or XILS or U-He indeed yes! Without any hesitation !
Kinda odd, considering that Arturias ARP 2600 was made by Xavier Oudin, a.k.a. XILS-lab.

And as to accuracy; lets not forget that there were several revisions of the ARP 2600. They had different oscillators, different filters, etc. Obviously Xavier and Jim did not emulate the same one, so comparing the two as though there was only one ARP 2600 makes no sense. They are different, but for a reason.
Where did I touch on the accuracy between the work of Arturia and the work of Xavier? Nowhere.
Build your life everyday as if you would live for a thousand years. Marvel at the Life everyday as if you would die tomorrow.
I'm now severely diseased since September 2018.

Post

It seems to be fairly widely felt that up to and including 2600V, Arturia's emulations were reminiscent of the hardware, but not meticulously accurate like their newer emulations. Those early emulations are certainly useful and have some clever features, but many people (including me) don't think they have "that authentic sound".

Post

ENV1 wrote: Tue Nov 19, 2019 11:15 am Kinda odd, considering that Arturias ARP 2600 was made by Xavier Oudin, a.k.a. XILS-lab.
Does it say 'digital analog filter copied from original' when it's not? :hihi:
ENV1 wrote: Tue Nov 19, 2019 5:53 pm What i was saying was that the ARP 2600, i.e. the hardware, has undergone several substantial revisions, and that it is obvious that Xavier and Jim did not emulate the same revision. In other words i was not talking about minute differences between units of the same revision, i was talking about substantial differences between different revisions, namely oscillator and filter modules, (among other stuff), i.e. the two very parts that most define the sound of a synthesizer.
Welcome to French Resistance.
Murderous duck!

Post

BlackWinny wrote: What was my point when I wrote my message was not in the differences between models nor even between revisions... but between developers of software emulations.
Im not sure i see the difference.

At any rate, to imply that some other developer would automatically do better than Arturia/Xavier did seems a bit dismissive of Arturia and a tad 'fanboyish' towards certain other developers. Because as someone who has actually done some comparisons i can tell you that lines like 'sounds nothing like the original' is utter nonsense, i.e. maybe there is a lot less left to be improved than some perhaps believe. (Plus i found it funny that one of the developers you named as your preferred candidates actually is responsible for the Arturia version, but lets not quibble over that. I dont know everything either.)

BlackWinny wrote:Where did I touch on the accuracy between the work of Arturia and the work of Xavier? Nowhere.
It was a general comment.

I thought this was obvious since you yourself didnt say anything about that.

Post

Pfff... Let's drop it.
Build your life everyday as if you would live for a thousand years. Marvel at the Life everyday as if you would die tomorrow.
I'm now severely diseased since September 2018.

Post

abernathy wrote: Mon Nov 18, 2019 8:52 pm
zerocrossing wrote: Mon Nov 18, 2019 8:29 pm
HunterKiller wrote: Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:09 am
zerocrossing wrote: Sat Nov 09, 2019 7:22 pmTimewARP did sound a bit better than 2600 V, but I wouldn’t give that dude another dime of my money, even if he updated it and made it even better. He totally let his customers down and he deserves no second chance.
You know what's even worse, after Jim promised to update it, with all these incredible ideas (I was talking privately to him, and his version 2 was gonna be brilliant), nothing happened.

He then sold the synth to Sonivox who also promised to update it, several years back, and then nothing. If this synth has not been plagued by a string of bad luck I don't know what has. Even since it was released, back in 2004, when everyone hated iLok, it just would not take off, because of that. And then when iLok got its game sorted out, it had largely been forgotten about.

That said, to this day I really like it, because of its non-Moog sound. It sounds like an ARP, more raw and "off the map", similar to the EMS synths.
Yeah, I had heard such things. It really leaves a big giant hole in the emulation world. I would hope that GForce would fill that hole, since they have already emulated the ARP filters in Oddity. Arturia could obviously do it, but they seem to have their sights set on other things.
I always thought TimewARP was sadly unappreciated and then neglected. It still has a unique hardware-like randomness, like electronics gone crazy - which I imagine is what twiddling the hardware is like.

Will be interesting to see if Arturia ever does a real version 2 of something (redoing the sound engine). But I’d rather have a Gforce or Synapse 2600.

My first concert was the Edgar Winter Group... seeing Frankenstein performed live with Edgar throwing his whole body on his 2600 left an indelible print on my brain!
You nailed it. Back in the day, the comments were "this sounds broken" to "I'm not getting this because of iLok, but I absolutely love the sound". A lot of people were used to the flatness and predictability of the "VSTi" sound of that era, so something that really did sound like unpredictable electronics of the early hardware modulars was alien to people and scary, they didn't know how to polish it.

Funnily enough, it's not until DIVA came along, 5 years later, with its well known Moog sound, and a more predictable end result that analog in software was starting to be taken seriously.
"The educated person is one who knows how to find out what he does not know" - George Simmel
“It's what you learn after you know it all that counts.” - John Wooden

Post

BlackWinny wrote: Mon Nov 18, 2019 10:43 pm Xavier Oudin (Xils) could be also another challenger. And perhaps he could ask Jean-Michel Jarre (who uses Syn'X) to lend him his 2600 to work quietly on it all the time needed. It would be a great collaboration, even if JMJ's role were limited to that loan.
The only thing I want to see Jarre and some serious developer tackle is the coveted RMI Harmonic Synthesizer (with all the modern bells and whistles) and the prized Eminent 310U organ. For once a non-Hammond organ in software! :roll: :hihi:
"The educated person is one who knows how to find out what he does not know" - George Simmel
“It's what you learn after you know it all that counts.” - John Wooden

Post Reply

Return to “Instruments”