Viper｜1.2.2 update with bugfixes and new skin

[chk071]

can we get a mac version?

no.

[plrdmus]

What important or major features of the Virus TI are not yet implemented into Viper?
- Grain and Formant wavetable types
- Wave PWM
- "Analog" filter which was modeled after the Mini Moog cascade filter with self-oscillation.
- LFOs with 68 waveforms to choose from
- Tape delay?
What else?

-Vocoder

And minor ones:
-Some modmatrix destinations
-Softknobs (or macros)

[adamszabo]

How soon, before we can expect new soundbanks using these new wavetables, and other banks?

I need to release an update with some bugfixes, and after that I will get to work on rewriting the gui to have custom skins. I will create lots of soundbanks in paralell, so new content will arrive for viper

[Vortifex]

Edited

[adamszabo]

Yes, I never mentioned that every single feature of the Virus TI will be included in Viper. I am open to ideas but I cant promise anything though.

[anoise]

I may be wrong but I don't think Adam has ever given the impression that Viper is supposed to be or will ever become a 1:1 recreation of the Virus.

I know, but it would be great wouldn't it? I was just curious what is missing compared to the Virus. I have no idea, but I suspect the LFOs with waveforms and the wavetable PWM are relatively easy to do for completeness sake.
Are the Grain and Formant effects on the wavetables not "just" warp modes applied to the waveforms, like in Serum, Vital and other wavetable synths?
I guess the algorithms are hard to match to sound identical to the virus, without the source code.

[Vortifex]

Edited

[adamszabo]

The problem is that there are too many technical challenges and my knowledge in dsp is not infinite. Additional LFO waveforms should be fairly easy, however the way it works now, was not designed for that, and if I were to change it, I have to change quite a lot internally and will most likely break already existing patches. I have to think about that. The rest of the Virus TI Oscillators I dont even know how they work without seeing any source code, which obviously I will never see. If anyone can figure it out then I am all ears.

On another note, in theory it would be possible to import Virus patches, my only concern is if are there any legality issues with it? Do I need permission from Access for me to be able to import their patches? I am not knowledgeable in these matters, if someone has any advice please share. Basically I would just be "reading" the patches and it wouldnt modify them in any way. As far as I know, other commercial Vst as alternate midi controllers for the Virus can also open midi patches and can communicate with the Virus and that seems to be fine. I would also be doing the same, except I would just convert the read data to a format that Viper understand so it can open it. However I dont know if Access would be happy that Virus presets could be opened with another product. I guess I could send them an email and ask but if they say no then I wont take any risks. On the other hand if I dont ask, and do it, then they might never notice or care, but I wouldnt want any lawyers knocking at my door later on.

[anoise]

You probably have seen this video, but there is some nice info in there about the Grain and Formant Oscillators:


Ask Access for help, maybe they will, you never know.

[recursive one]

Preset converters do exist, e.g. the one made for Prophet5/Repro and promoted by U-He themselves, so generally there's nothing wrong with that.

In theory some problems could happen if the Virus preset format uses some technology patented by Access, so I'd look if such patents exist and if they are still in force (which I doubt - afaik Virus TI is patch compatible with older models so the preset system probably didn't change in the whole 20+ years of Virus history - so the patents, if any, likey have already expired).

[plrdmus]

Preset converters do exist, e.g. the one made for Prophet5/Repro and promoted by U-He themselves, so generally there's nothing wrong with that.

Or discoDSP Discovery.

I doubt there's any problem with opening Virus patches. It's the user who provides the files.

Same thing happens with console emulators and ROMs. Emulators are legal unless they're using stolen source code.
There's nothing Nintendo and Sony can do to stop emulation (only ROM distribution), so I really doubt Access Music can do anything with this.

In worst case scenario, a converter could be released as an external tool.

[fdigl]

Another example is ReactOS, an operating system project that aims to be a free binary compatible Windows alternative made using the "cleanroom" method where no source code nor private documentation was used to reverse engineer. You can run a fair amount of Windows applications on it, but since it's not claiming to actually *be* Windows and does not use any illegal means to reproduce the functionality of the operating system, ReactOS can freely exist without repercussion from Microsoft.

In this case, ReactOS is Viper and Windows is the Virus, with the Virus TI patches acting as the "Windows applications".

EDIT: It's possible that there is already a legal precedent, back in the early days of home computing with IBM vs IBM compatible machines

[plrdmus]

Another example is ReactOS, an operating system project that aims to be a free binary compatible Windows alternative made using the "cleanroom" method where no source code nor private documentation was used to reverse engineer. You can run a fair amount of Windows applications on it, but since it's not claiming to actually *be* Windows and does not use any illegal means to reproduce the functionality of the operating system, ReactOS can freely exist without repercussion from Microsoft.

In this case, ReactOS is Viper and Windows is the Virus, with the Virus TI patches acting as the "Windows applications".

EDIT: It's possible that there is already a legal precedent, back in the early days of home computing with IBM vs IBM compatible machines

This.
The only thing I'm not sure is about the use of a trademark
eg: advertising it as an Access Virus emulation

[fdigl]

Another example is ReactOS, an operating system project that aims to be a free binary compatible Windows alternative made using the "cleanroom" method where no source code nor private documentation was used to reverse engineer. You can run a fair amount of Windows applications on it, but since it's not claiming to actually *be* Windows and does not use any illegal means to reproduce the functionality of the operating system, ReactOS can freely exist without repercussion from Microsoft.

In this case, ReactOS is Viper and Windows is the Virus, with the Virus TI patches acting as the "Windows applications".

EDIT: It's possible that there is already a legal precedent, back in the early days of home computing with IBM vs IBM compatible machines

This.
The only thing I'm not sure is about the use of a trademark
eg: advertising it as an Access Virus emulation

In this case you only need to mention compatibility with Access Virus patches as a feature, not the main facet of the software. Viper is perfectly capable of being its own synth - it can be marketed as a Virus-inspired synth rather than an emulation.

[adamszabo]

Thanks for the feedback guys. Yes, I will never mention in any marketing material that Viper is an "Access Virus" emulation, Viper is its own thing. However saying that it would be compatible with Virus patches I dont think should be any problem.