KVR Audio

c_voltage · Post by **c_voltage** » Sat Dec 12, 2020 10:59 pm

Lotuz2019 wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 9:33 pm Does anyone here know which parameters control the Start and End points of Emulator II V?

CMI V has these parameters for example:

Track 1 StartSeg
Track 1 SampleLength

I hope I'm wrong, but it seems the Start and End points of Emulator II V can only be moved with the mouse.

Ty for info, downloaded demo for check it (for me it important feature too) so can confirm, hope dev's add automation to this parameters.
Though, need note that for almost all other parameters in advanced section automation was implemented properly, even for each layer separately, that good work.
Ok, i will not appeal to differences between CMI etc. Quite liked how it sounds, and good samples library (native i hope).
But also need note cpu usage (especially during increased poly), that seems unclear a bit for such relatively simple engine. (I even did check single layer only, and with disabled vintage emu).

Echoes in the Attic · Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:14 pm

Funkybot's Evil Twin wrote: Sat Dec 12, 2020 10:27 pm
Echoes in the Attic wrote: Sat Dec 12, 2020 10:07 pm But their Mini V I've always liked.
That's where we wildly differ. Every now and then I'll load up Mini V thinking, "c'mon, it can't be as bad as you remember" and I find that my memory is better than I give it credit for.

Compared to The Legend, Monark, Diva, the Softube, my Poly-D...that Mini V just does not hold up at all IMO.

I agree that it doesn't quite hold up to all those in terms of of accuracy of emulation, I just think it's easy to get nice sounds out of it.

ozinga · Post by **ozinga** » Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:15 pm

JUN-06, when both Chorus I and II on, the sound is wrong. It becomes a weird mono sound. On the contrary it should be wider. One of the best things about Juno Sound.

aMUSEd · Post by **aMUSEd** » Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:28 pm

Echoes in the Attic wrote: Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:14 pm
Funkybot's Evil Twin wrote: Sat Dec 12, 2020 10:27 pm
Echoes in the Attic wrote: Sat Dec 12, 2020 10:07 pm But their Mini V I've always liked.
That's where we wildly differ. Every now and then I'll load up Mini V thinking, "c'mon, it can't be as bad as you remember" and I find that my memory is better than I give it credit for.

Compared to The Legend, Monark, Diva, the Softube, my Poly-D...that Mini V just does not hold up at all IMO.
I agree that it doesn't quite hold up to all those in terms of of accuracy of emulation, I just think it's easy to get nice sounds out of it.

There's a lovely patch in the Synthopedia collection by Menno Meijer (who is one of my favourite sound designers) called 'Tau Ceti' - I would never have dreamed of such a patch coming from a Minimoog but it is astounding. The nice thing about the Arturia MiniMoog is the additional modulations, which this makes great use of.

DarkStar · Post by **DarkStar** » Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:41 pm

Anyone tried these out on Windows 7?

I understand that Arturia has tested them on Windows 8.1 upwards but they have not explicitly done anything to prevent them running on Windows 7.

RusanBaymuratov · Post by **RusanBaymuratov** » Sun Dec 13, 2020 12:40 am

Sorry for double-post:

Hi! I'm newbie to Pigments 2. Have a question about VCA envelope : why it restart without release for same notes , for example , if I set long release and will playing chord , then push same notes again - release of previous notes will be stopped .

Examigan · Post by **Examigan** » Sun Dec 13, 2020 1:14 am

RusanBaymuratov wrote: Sun Dec 13, 2020 12:40 am Sorry for double-post:

Hi! I'm newbie to Pigments 2. Have a question about VCA envelope : why it restart without release for same notes , for example , if I set long release and will playing chord , then push same notes again - release of previous notes will be stopped .

Maybe the overall voices aren't dialed up far enough?

Niowiad · Post by **Niowiad** » Sun Dec 13, 2020 1:17 am

I think it's the voice stealing mode (on the "KEYBOARD" tab)... "Rotate" instead of "Reassign"

RusanBaymuratov · Post by **RusanBaymuratov** » Sun Dec 13, 2020 2:17 am

Niowiad wrote: Sun Dec 13, 2020 1:17 am I think it's the voice stealing mode (on the "KEYBOARD" tab)... "Rotate" instead of "Reassign"

yes it is! Big thanks to You!

nevernamed · Post by **nevernamed** » Sun Dec 13, 2020 2:25 am

ozinga wrote: Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:15 pm JUN-06, when both Chorus I and II on, the sound is wrong. It becomes a weird mono sound. On the contrary it should be wider. One of the best things about Juno Sound.

Actually the behaviour is correct. On both my Juno 6 and 60 this is exactly what happens when you push both of the buttons in. I guess you've never owned the hardware? It is a common misconception that pressing both buttons results in a richer, thicker chorus sound but I can assure you this is NOT what happens on the hardware unit mate. I think someone must have taken a creative license when modeling this in software and just enhanced the depth and stereo spread of the chorus.

mholloway · Post by **mholloway** » Sun Dec 13, 2020 2:53 am

nevernamed wrote: Sun Dec 13, 2020 2:25 am
ozinga wrote: Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:15 pm JUN-06, when both Chorus I and II on, the sound is wrong. It becomes a weird mono sound. On the contrary it should be wider. One of the best things about Juno Sound.
Actually the behaviour is correct. On both my Juno 6 and 60 this is exactly what happens when you push both of the buttons in. I guess you've never owned the hardware? It is a common misconception that pressing both buttons results in a richer, thicker chorus sound but I can assure you this is NOT what happens on the hardware unit mate. I think someone must have taken a creative license when modeling this in software and just enhanced the depth and stereo spread of the chorus.

I tried to explain this earlier in the thread and I think folks didn't believe me.

This is what happens when the basis of comparison is TAL U-No-LX instead of a hardware Juno 6/60/106. People no longer know what they are talking about. They think it's "wrong" because the 'other' emulation didn't do it that way. It's TAL that is 'wrong', in actuality....not that anybody minds, per se!

The recently released 106 from Cherry Audio spawned a thread where this exact same thing happened, because their plugin also 'correctly' models the Juno hardware chorus behavior. "The chorus is broken with I + II both selected!" Devs: "Actually, it's not!" Etc etc.

I'm glad someone with the hardware has finally chimed in to clear this up, yet again. Cheers.

Niowiad · Post by **Niowiad** » Sun Dec 13, 2020 3:36 am

That's true (and I also didn't know that btw

)

Minute 02:05

Funkybot's Evil Twin · Sun Dec 13, 2020 3:47 am

The question isn't is the I+II sound mono, the question is, does the software chorus sound shitty? The I+II mode sounds like it's got a tremolo on it because of the bizarre LFO depth and the chorus sounds thin in the other two modes. If you have the hardware do a simple test: saw wave, filter wide open, ADSR set to organ settings, raw saw, then chorus I, then chorus II, then I+II. Then repeat on the software. Post the results.

Niowiad · Post by **Niowiad** » Sun Dec 13, 2020 3:59 am

That seems noticeable in the video too.
At 02:01 he activates the chorus and it sounds like the I+II configuration later shown, mono and with the weird "tremolo" effect.
He then proceeds to show chorus I, then II, then I+II again, which is again mono but the "tremolo" effect isn't as noticeable as it was at 02:01 because of the pluck-like envelope he just changed, but you can still hear it.
At least that's my impression.

Further hardware comparisons from Juno6/60 owners are of course more than welcome.

surreal · Post by **surreal** » Sun Dec 13, 2020 5:43 am

Niowiad wrote: Sun Dec 13, 2020 3:36 am That's true (and I also didn't know that btw )

Minute 02:05

Intresting!!

Arturia V Collection 8 official thread