One Synth Challenge #158: Surrealistic MG-1 Plus by Cherry Audio (MilksterX Wins!)

[BrianG42]

Hi All,

New to the Forum and the music challenges,
have been toying in the studio for the last 3 years

had fun in the studio with the one synth comp
Used Logic Pro X and standard plug-in's on a Mac
14 instances of the Cherry Audio Surrealistic MG-1
FX: Echo, Tape delay, Gated reverb, Med ambient reverb, Med chamber reverb, Gate, Channel EQ
All through the Multipressor at the end

https://soundcloud.com/user-541974581/k ... al_sharing

Hope this works as is last minute joining of KVR and Soundcloud, (work to do)

[BrianG42]

PS: Forgot to mention how great all the entries have been that I have listened to, some vert talented players out there.

[violator_alba]

Well, here's my effort ready to chuck over the wall with little time left:

https://soundcloud.com/violator-alba-99 ... al_sharing

As stated previously, I also came here via the Cherry Audio newsletter. What a great idea this challenge is: it's encouraged me to try a synth I acquired when it first appeared and never really used.
Anyway, track was created with Tracktion Waveform Pro 12 using seven MG1 instances with a mix of presets and some of my own creations. All effects came with Waveform.
We have three tracks for percussion: kick, snare and random percussive noise thingy. Bit of a delay on the kick and a bit of compression to tie them together. Then there's a bass track with a wee bit of reverb I don't remember adding. Next comes a lead for the basic melody with some twinkly highlights on another track. Finally there's another buzzy bass with sidechained compression because why not? The whole lot then goes through the Master Mix processor that also came with Waveform.
Aside from the percussion tracks, all midi was generated using multiple Scaler 2 instances with the resulting midi pasted into the various tracks.
Here's hoping this isn't too aurally offensive...

[Yadrichik_Chaya]

I have to freeze some tracks in my entry and try to render in real time instead because some really
”freaky” stuff is happening - with the project idle the CPU is at 90% and over 20GB RAM(!) is used haha, no wonder it is all messed up… A proper entry will be up before the deadline!

[Madmac66]

At the rules page it is stated
Most 3rd party plugin effects are allowed (Again, see below for what NOT to use):

How much clearer do you need it to be made?

Erm. Like much clearer mate. Like, not vague or misleading. Saying MOST when you mean SOME. Thats a big one. MOST VSTs are NOT free. Some ARE. Big F'ing difference mate. And here's another clue, don't lead with MOST 3RD PARTY PIs only to contradict that statement on the following line. Geez, its not rocket science.

Here, maybe I can spell it out for you:

Effects - what is allowed:

• Most Native DAW effects may be used (see below for what NOT to use)
  
  ONLY free 3rd party plugin effects are allowed (Again, see below for what NOT to use) Check out a list of valid free plugins here:
  
  No plug-in betas, demos, magware or freeware that has expired, unless a special exception is made that month.
  
  Distortion: Please use distortion / tape saturation / bit crushing sparingly. Use your etc etc etc.

Effects - what is NOT allowed:

• Commercial plugins: ALL paid plugins are are forbidden
  
  Chorus, flanger, phaser, rotary, or related modular effects.
  
  Etc etc etc

There ya go mate, that's what CLARITY looks like like in my world. You're welcome, and F*** you very much

[RichardSemper]

At the rules page it is stated
Most 3rd party plugin effects are allowed (Again, see below for what NOT to use):

How much clearer do you need it to be made?

Erm. Like much clearer mate. Like, not vague or misleading.

Sorry, but I would STRONGLY suggest that you reconsider the tone and wording of your post!
Placing asterisks to hide offensive language does not make it any less offensive in my opinion.

The point about rules has been made, and we will look again at the wording.

[SeBaer]

At the rules page it is stated
Most 3rd party plugin effects are allowed (Again, see below for what NOT to use):

How much clearer do you need it to be made?

Erm. Like much clearer mate. Like, not vague or misleading.

Or you could just willfully ignore the part I highlighted.

There ya go mate, that's what CLARITY looks like like in my world. You're welcome, and F*** you very much

Thanks dude, you too

[silverpants]

CONTROL FREAKS HAVE NO JOYSTICK (Only Button Pushing)

control freak

You're mad as a hatter and a pure joy to the world
You always make me laugh.

[] Peter:H []

[...]

There ya go mate, that's what CLARITY looks like like in my world. You're welcome, and F*** you very much

Thanks dude, you too

I think Madmac66 wanted to say Funk you ... or feel you?
I feel he is kind of right about "clarity" because we have to be honest: the rules or at least parts of it are as they are now not clear in a sense of a scientific definition... what is "light use of distortion"? That is really up to interpretation and I bet no track ever has been investigated based on this rule, because you can't tell whether use is "light" or when the exact limit has reached and it's 0,1 over the limit and considered "strong"... it's up to interpretation and thus disputable. 2nd symptom is that mostly every newcomer has the same set of questions and runs into confusion. Why's that?
Newcomers might run into a situation where they build and finished a track and only afterwards discover they have violated the rules and need to do major rework.
I mean - take the discussion about licensing. I myself wasn't aware that the tracks might end up in an archive with CC license unless the discussion in this thread. I want this archive and licensing part removed from the OSC as well...

[silverpants]

Here is my submission "Eleven Dozen Cousins"

https://soundcloud.com/slugnest/silverp ... al_sharing

132 Instances of Surrealistic MG-1
DAW = Reaper
ReaEQ ReaComp DD Compressor, DD Filter, DD Monodelay.
OrilRiver Reverb
ReaCompX, Limiter No6, SPAN

[SeBaer]

I think Madmac66 wanted to say Funk you ... or feel you?

That's certainly the way I read it, hence my amicable reply, wishing him the same I would never even dream about insulting a random stranger on the internet...

I feel he is kind of right about "clarity" because we have to be honest: the rules or at least parts of it are as they are now not clear in a sense of a scientific definition... what is "light use of distortion"? That is really up to interpretation and I bet no track ever has been investigated based on this rule, because you can't tell whether use is "light" or when the exact limit has reached and it's 0,1 over the limit and considered "strong"... it's up to interpretation and thus disputable. 2nd symptom is that mostly every newcomer has the same set of questions and runs into confusion. Why's that?
Newcomers might run into a situation where they build and finished a track and only afterwards discover they have violated the rules and need to do major rework.

Asking for clarity is one thing, totally okay with that. The clearer the rules, the better. But the attitude of telling other they're wrong without having read and understood the rules, could rub people the wrong way, and did. And resorting to profanity when someone disagrees, is just...
...'not very clever'.

I mean - take the discussion about licensing. I myself wasn't aware that the tracks might end up in an archive with CC license unless the discussion in this thread. I want this archive and licensing part removed from the OSC as well...

Well, it's a perfectly valid opinion to not like the CC licensing aspect. To demand the removal (... want vs. would like ...; I know you're not a native speaker, but our common language has similar nuances) of this rule is not the same as having a civilized discussion about it. Also, the practise of archiving the submissions has already been abandoned after August 2020. Which I personally find regrettable, because if people delete their tracks from SoundCloud (which is totally their right), there are some puzzle pieces missing from the whole field of submissions, sometimes even high ranking tracks. I find it even more regrettable when you take down your tracks, they're always very ejoyable.

Cheers and hugs

[RichardSemper]

the practise of archiving the submissions has already been abandoned after August 2020.

The submissions archiving has not actually been abandoned. There have been technical issues relating to this which will hopefully be resolved sometime.

[empphryio]

I made a couple minor changes and reuploaded. Same file. (Removed some delay, changed a couple notes, added a funky backbeat (not really)).

If I knew of a good alternative for ShaperBox I would say, but not quite sure how you used it and haven't used it before. I would just filter/pan with my DAW. It can be a bit confusing at first. Best of luck to all of you.

[FrogsInPants]

Asking for clarity is one thing, totally okay with that. The clearer the rules, the better. But the attitude of telling other they're wrong without having read and understood the rules, could rub people the wrong way, and did. And resorting to profanity when someone disagrees, is just...
...'not very clever'.

Actually, your response rubbed me the wrong way more than Madmac66's response to me. Madmac66 simply misread the rules, and objected to my statement that commercial plugins aren't allowed based on that misunderstanding. Looking at the structure of that bullet point in the rules, it's easy to see why it's misread from time to time. Your response of "How much clearer do you need it to be made?" comes off to me as unnecessarily hostile and insulting to a new participant who is already facing the frustrating prospect of disqualification or having to redo a bunch of work on their entry at the last minute.

Yeah, Madmac66's response escalated the hostility out of proportion. But it was otherwise reasonable, and I find the frustration behind it quite understandable. And here you are, still being insulting and acting like your own response was totally justified. Maybe you don't mean it that way, but please take a step back and consider how this comes off from the perspective of a newcomer who is frustrated due to misreading the rules and trying to explain why.

[BrainBeatMusic]

I feel he is kind of right about "clarity" because we have to be honest: the rules or at least parts of it are as they are now not clear in a sense of a scientific definition... what is "light use of distortion"? That is really up to interpretation and I bet no track ever has been investigated based on this rule, because you can't tell whether use is "light" or when the exact limit has reached and it's 0,1 over the limit and considered "strong"... it's up to interpretation and thus disputable. 2nd symptom is that mostly every newcomer has the same set of questions and runs into confusion. Why's that?
Newcomers might run into a situation where they build and finished a track and only afterwards discover they have violated the rules and need to do major rework.
I mean - take the discussion about licensing. I myself wasn't aware that the tracks might end up in an archive with CC license unless the discussion in this thread. I want this archive and licensing part removed from the OSC as well...

I am a first-time competitor and while I did very carefully read the rules there is for sure some ambiguous points that I have tried to get clarified over the last few weeks including the CC part. I at least made most of my base track and shared it a few weeks ago listing what I had used thinking that I had a few effects that were not allowed. After some clarification and people listening I did do some things differently to make it ok and still sound the same. But I do still have some light saturation on my bass and drums as I wanted to bring out more of the character of these elements.

One thing I can say for sure I never took the interpretation that you could use any paid effects as it was obvious to me the reason was you had to be able to share the source music so the judges could inspect it and to do so would be hard if you were using an expensive paid effect.

Hopefully, for next month's competition, we can have the judges reword some of the rules to make them as clear as possible to all entrants as trying to stay inside the defined box is half the fun.