Tal J-8

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

Version 1.1.7

Improved SC dialog.
SC / Calibration lock.
Bug fixes.

rsp

New SC page is much improved. My thanks to Patrick!

[mholloway]

If you want all the features of a modern synth then an emulation of a classic is probably not for you.

I always found this attitude a bit strange. Just because it is an exacting emulation doesn't mean you have to remove features. Aftertouch would indeed be very welcome as an addition and it wouldn't take away anything from the plugin/emulation.

I personally don't find it strange at all. The concept of wanting to quite literally create the experience of using a classic synth -- limitations and all -- is totally understandable to me. It's why Monark is a mono-synth, why Repro-1 is a monosynth, why Repro-5 doesn't have the mono-legato mode Repro-1 has, and so on.

I think the main reason it makes sense is this: if it's meant to be an Accurate Emulation, and you start adding features X, Y and Z because 'some people' want them, where does it stop? You want aftertouch, someone else wants a proper mod-matrix, someone else wants..... pretty soon, what's the point of it being an 'emulation'? Why not just go use Massive X or Zebra if you need all that additional, non-emulation functionality? It's just a snowball effect at that point, and soon the synth isn't an emulation at all. Look at LuSH-101 -- it's a great synth, always has been. But it seems utterly pointless to view it as an SH-101 emulation. It just became its own thing, somewhere along the line. I like it as a synth, I don't like it as an SH-101 emulation.

[Sinisterbr]

Yeah, I think this is the classical situation where you can't please everyone (and I do understand both sides).

[bmanic]

If you want all the features of a modern synth then an emulation of a classic is probably not for you.

I always found this attitude a bit strange. Just because it is an exacting emulation doesn't mean you have to remove features. Aftertouch would indeed be very welcome as an addition and it wouldn't take away anything from the plugin/emulation.

I personally don't find it strange at all. The concept of wanting to quite literally create the experience of using a classic synth -- limitations and all -- is totally understandable to me. It's why Monark is a mono-synth, why Repro-1 is a monosynth, why Repro-5 doesn't have the mono-legato mode Repro-1 has, and so on.

I think the main reason it makes sense is this: if it's meant to be an Accurate Emulation, and you start adding features X, Y and Z because 'some people' want them, where does it stop? You want aftertouch, someone else wants a proper mod-matrix, someone else wants..... pretty soon, what's the point of it being an 'emulation'? Why not just go use Massive X or Zebra if you need all that additional, non-emulation functionality?

So, I get this 'attitude' 100%. Some of like the limitations of the 'pure' emulation. We just want that synth -- but in the box.

.. but TAL J-8 already has tons of features the original didn't! I can understand the concept if it is indeed a "pure" emulation.

All your examples above are also in a similar awkward situation.. they have more features than the original. As for Monark, it uses huge amounts of CPU so it's no wonder they decided to keep it mono. As far as I recall it was even said so at the NI forums.

Also you are operating these things mainly with a mouse and you don't have access to the original keybed. So having a "pure" experience is impossible to begin with. Thus I still feel that saying "aftertouch" as a feature somehow shouldn't be there because TAL J-8 tries to be an exact emulation is a bit silly.. considering how common aftertouch is and how useful it is in a live playing context.

I do however agree with you about feature creep. When things go completely out of touch with the original, that's when it can become a problem.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

I always found this attitude a bit strange. Just because it is an exacting emulation doesn't mean you have to remove features. Aftertouch would indeed be very welcome as an addition and it wouldn't take away anything from the plugin/emulation.

Yeah, but you also can't implement everything right? Thinking beyond this particular synth, we all have our pet features (aftertouch, MPE, more effects, parameter locks, tuning pages with slop, arpeggiators, MSEG's, etc.)...where's the line? It's just one more feature that I really want. One more feature you really want. Another feature some other person really wants. And hey, they're all just additions, they don't take anything away from the original.

I mean, it certainly doesn't hurt to ask, I certainly do, but developers can't implement everyone's pet feature. Even if it's the biggest thing in the world to someone. Developers have to draw a line somewhere.

And this is still a young product. Maybe it will get aftertouch, or more assignable MPE, or parameter locks and linkages...who knows? But the idea that adding one extra feature doesn't take anything away, while true in many cases, needs to be balanced with the fact that developers can't possibly just add everyone's "one extra feature."

[bmanic]

I always found this attitude a bit strange. Just because it is an exacting emulation doesn't mean you have to remove features. Aftertouch would indeed be very welcome as an addition and it wouldn't take away anything from the plugin/emulation.

Yeah, but you also can't implement everything right? Thinking beyond this particular synth, we all have our pet features (aftertouch, MPE, more effects, parameter locks, tuning pages with slop, arpeggiators, MSEG's, etc.)...where's the line? It's just one more feature that I really want. One more feature you really want. Another feature some other person really wants. And hey, they're all just additions, they don't take anything away from the original.

I mean, it certainly doesn't hurt to ask, I certainly do, but developers can't implement everyone's pet feature. Even if it's the biggest thing in the world to someone. Developers have to draw a line somewhere.

And this is still a young product. Maybe it will get aftertouch, or more assignable MPE, or parameter locks and linkages...who knows? But the idea that adding one extra feature doesn't take anything away, while true in many cases, needs to be balanced with the fact that developers can't possibly just add everyone's "one extra feature."

Totally agree! .. but if there ever was a "standard" feature of pretty much any synth, be it an emulation or not, it's aftertouch. I'd say only pitch bend, modwheel and sustain pedal go before it in terms of "standard" things to implement.

EDIT: Having said that.. aftertouch can be applied within the DAW to any of the parameters that are exposed for automation so it really is pretty much a non-issue.

[perpetual3]

I for one would appreciate polyAT, as well as more modulators like Arturia’s version. But that doesn’t stop me from loving the J-8.

[Dencheg]

Hey Patrick... I think I'm risking to be viewed as "Special Annoying Force", but I really hope you'll consider adding the raster scrollwheel behavior to the discrete controls & switches of let's say J-8 (and let's say of other plugs). To me, when a plug supports this, it instantly gets a reward, star and a "mousewheel-friendly" prize in my mind (used to be platinum, but now it's golden as gold got pricier then platinum).

Per my understanding this feature would be appreciated by a smaller part of the users, but it would be appreciated greatly (so the area of the appreciation function would still be considerable), and I suppose it's pretty feasible as it's no DSP magic.

[e-crooner]

What do you mean by raster scroll wheel behavior? .50 instead of weird values such as .63 etc.?

[marzzz]

If you want all the features of a modern synth then an emulation of a classic is probably not for you.

I always found this attitude a bit strange. Just because it is an exacting emulation doesn't mean you have to remove features. Aftertouch would indeed be very welcome as an addition and it wouldn't take away anything from the plugin/emulation.

I personally don't find it strange at all. The concept of wanting to quite literally create the experience of using a classic synth -- limitations and all -- is totally understandable to me. It's why Monark is a mono-synth, why Repro-1 is a monosynth, why Repro-5 doesn't have the mono-legato mode Repro-1 has, and so on.

...and you can operate within these limitations if you so desire. But as already pointed out, several modern features have already been added to J-8 including MPE, so a request for (poly)aftertouch response I wouldn't think is too much more to request. Just MHO anyway...

Edit: Adding aftertouch in a DAW kinda goes against my desire to use it as a real-time performance parameter.

[EvilDragon]

What do you mean by raster scroll wheel behavior? .50 instead of weird values such as .63 etc.?

There are mousewheels that are smooth when turning, and there are mousewheels that ratchet/click when turning. The latter are rastered.

Jumps in weird values is a JUCE thing. It's apparently not very easy to work around it, gotta rewrite mousewheel handling basically (from my understanding).

[e-crooner]

Oh, you mean continuous like a ribbon controller? I have never come across such a mouse wheel. I thought all mouse wheels go notch by notch.

[Hink]

What do you mean by raster scroll wheel behavior? .50 instead of weird values such as .63 etc.?

There are mousewheels that are smooth when turning, and there are mousewheels that ratchet/click when turning. The latter are rastered.

Jumps in weird values is a JUCE thing. It's apparently not very easy to work around it, gotta rewrite mousewheel handling basically (from my understanding).

never heard that before and the only other reference for it I found is you on a cuckos forum talking about it...not saying it isnt true because tech terms and all...you always hear new things...I googled define rastered though and this is what I found

: a scan pattern (as of the electron beam in a cathode-ray tube) in which an area is scanned from side to side in lines from top to bottom also : a pattern of closely spaced rows of dots that form an image (as on the cathode-ray tube of a television or computer display)

https://www.google.com/search?client=fi ... q=rastered

[4damind]

In the meantime there are some new comparisons and tests.
It seems that some people prefer the Arturia (both on Gearslutz and on Youtube). Apart from the different features, some hear more low-end with the Arturia.
Anyway, I think Roland Cloud/System 8 is no longer without a competitor. Arturia and TAL are in the game now

Has anyone seen a test where the TAL J-8 is compared to the hardware?

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

Has anyone seen a test where the TAL J-8 is compared to the hardware?

Someone in the Gearslutz TAL thread did a basic comparison yesterday against his hardware. More tests are supposed to be coming.