UVI Dual Delay X

[jens]

What kind of modulation do you have in mind ?
Not sure we want DDX to be a modular delay with everything that can be modulated.
It's more on the KISS side. If you want to go wild maybe Relayer would be a better choice.

Is this going to remain your sole reply in regards to this topic/issue?

Please allow me to ask whether this is an official UVI video:



I had the impression it was the official product video. But perhaps I am wrong.

I am asking because this video has a whole chapter called "automating parameters" where the product specialist talks about using the plugin-host to automate parameters to create "a moving and evolving delay sound".
Frankly put, he doesn't suggest to use Relayer instead as per your own advice. Instead he suggested compensating the lack of a certain feature by making use of host functionality instead.

I will be brutally frank now:

I was really interested in Dual Delay X, but at this point I can't be bothered anymore. A sane reply would have done the trick. But this
- initially ignore - finally (when pressed hard) give ignorant reply that completely ignores the previous conversation on the topic in this very thread - ignore further -
completely puts me off (UVI for good). To me it appears bizarre.

[fairlyclose]

Man the privilege and sense of entitlement of some of the people on kvr is out of control.

[Dirtgrain]

I'm entitled as f**k, and I vote for modulators in Dual Delay X. As others have said, the way Shade does it is great. Now I'm thinking UVI ought to make something like Kilohearts Multipass with Shade's nifty modulation setup and options. Actually, I dislike the way Falcon does LFOs and such--could they make it like Shade, graphically, somehow incorporated?

[otristan]

What kind of modulation do you have in mind ?
Not sure we want DDX to be a modular delay with everything that can be modulated.
It's more on the KISS side. If you want to go wild maybe Relayer would be a better choice.

Is this going to remain your sole reply in regards to this topic/issue?

Please allow me to ask whether this is an official UVI video:



I had the impression it was the official product video. But perhaps I am wrong.

I am asking because this video has a whole chapter called "automating parameters" where the product specialist talks about using the plugin-host to automate parameters to create "a moving and evolving delay sound".
Frankly put, he doesn't suggest to use Relayer instead as per your own advice. Instead he suggested compensating the lack of a certain feature by making use of host functionality instead.

I will be brutally frank now:

I was really interested in Dual Delay X, but at this point I can't be bothered anymore. A sane reply would have done the trick. But this
- initially ignore - finally (when pressed hard) give ignorant reply that completely ignores the previous conversation on the topic in this very thread - ignore further -
completely puts me off (UVI for good). To me it appears bizarre.

The rationale behind DDX was to have a simple yet effective delay.
Not saying we will never add LFOs but this is not a short term priority. You can get by with automation depending on your needs, maybe not.
I don’t understand why you have felt that annoyed by my answers, but looks like we cannot please everyone…

C’est la vie.

[Synthient Sound]

Another perspective if it is ok. Delay-X with Shade style modulation is complicated, though it would be versatile. Delay-X with no modulation for the Feedback Shaping is kind of a missed opportunity. How about a much more tempered middle way?

Have one LFO with 4 or 5 selectable wave shapes (sine, triangle, square, and sample/hold). This would open up a lot of possibilities in sound with a couple of knobs and a sync/time switch. I've done a lot of fantastic sounds with Eventide or Strymon band delays, or really anything with a modulated filter in a delay line. So simple, but would give a lot of value to the plugin. With all its features, already it is hardly a simple delay (which was the reason I bought it). One LFO would really open it up for some awesome sound design.

btw, I use Logic and it is very easy to automate parameters on a MIDI track. It is an absolute nightmare of routing to try to modulate that filter on an instrument track like acoustic drums, electric guitar, bass, etc...anything I'd do in hardware.

[jens]

Have one LFO with 4 or 5 selectable wave shapes (sine, triangle, square, and sample/hold). This would open up a lot of possibilities in sound with a couple of knobs and a sync/time switch.[...] One LFO would really open it up for some awesome sound design

This is basically what I (and others) have suggested/requested several times in this thread.


edit: fixed quote

[jens]

I don’t understand why you have felt that annoyed by my answers

I was frustrated by the lack of an actual answer from you. The sole reply you gave was basically ignoring everything that was said earlier in the thread. And I have no reason to assume that you did not read
every single word that was written here, so my money is on a deliberate act of apparent obtuseness...

[c_voltage]

Pretty nice unit and good price.
During trialing appeared one need - general output level knob (additionally to already existing dry\wet). BTW input\output faders could be good suited in places where UI columns with input and output level meters in left and right sides.
Well, just it seems effect tends towards interesting dark'n'lo-fi feedback canvases (quite peculiar Feedback Shaping section + two modules in left side), which makes sense in full wet for extreme things, and this creates the need for more volume control. Just thinking out loud as they say.

EDIT:

+ two modules in left side

Oh typo - in right side i meant (Tape and Digital ones)

[PAK]

What kind of modulation do you have in mind ?

As I (and others) said a few times here in this thread, even just a single simple LFO that would be (more or less) freely asignable would be great.

Yep. We understand anything too complex would detract from the design goal for DDX. At the same time we're also hearing the results when moving the controls and we want a bit of that for our presets, without requiring DAW automation!

A single rate knob and a waveshape selector would suffice. Of course, the tricky part is how to assign whilst sticking to a KISS concept. Perhaps a drag and drop icon onto controls? No need for anything fancy like range indicators around controls or anything. Just a dot or colour change, to indicate modulation, is enough.

Something simple and fun, ala rubber ducky, would be nice. EG Maybe a little Pacman style ghost icon you'd drag onto controls? (Since they're haunted by the ghost and move by themselves!.. )

[gExpectations]

Or just use a daw with modulation :p. Delay X looks good. I kinda prefer tools without mod section, as I don't need it but i totally understand people who want it. I agree that marketing for automation implies modulation somewhat, as much automation can be replaced by automation but it doesnt necessarily coincide. Buildups and switches or specific patterning is still a matter of automation, modulation is mainly repeated parameter changes.

[Synthient Sound]

The problem with DAW modulation alone is that Logic can't automate plugins on an audio track (or at least not without a ludicrous amount work arounds). I can't have an LFO in logic move the filter when the plugin is used on an audio track. I can on a MIDI track, but when I'd be using this on a lot of guitar parts...

I know, ridiculous, but it does affect a lot of us. Plus you have the hassle of not being able to save that into the Delay-X presets themselves. This is a big deal to me. If I have to have more work arounds in my DAW to accommodate it, I'd rather just move on to something else.

If I was looking for relatively simple delay, I'd use Valhalla Delay or any of my other vintage modeled delays. This seems to have been designed as more tunable delay with all the phase and stereo field features. Better to at least have an LFO built into it.

[SynthasaurusRex]

Whatever UVI is going to do concerning modulation, it had better be quick, or announce that it's coming soon in an update. The introductory price expires July 31.

[cryophonik]

The problem with DAW modulation alone is that Logic can't automate plugins on an audio track (or at least not without a ludicrous amount work arounds). I can't have an LFO in logic move the filter when the plugin is used on an audio track. I can on a MIDI track, but when I'd be using this on a lot of guitar parts...

I'm not sure I'm following you here. You easily automate any available plugin parameters on an audio track in Logic by enabling automation and adding the parameter to an automation lane. Are you talking specifically about using the Modulator MIDI FX to automate effects on a separate audio track?

edit: OK, I think I see what you're saying. You can't add a simple tempo-sync'ed LFO in an automation lane in Logic (AFAIK, which sucks), and you can't send an LFO from the Modulator MIDI plugin to another plugin on an audio lane, so there's no convenient way to have a simple tempo-sync'ed LFO modulate the parameters in DDX.

[plexuss]

It's surprising that Apple has din't fixing these midi limitations with Logic all these decades. I know it has a lot going for it, since I used it since it was CLAB Creator c 1987. But I had to move away from Logic because of these and other limitations, alas. Maybe if enough people contact Apple... oh... wait... that won't work with Apple. You just have to decide if it's over-all worth the limitations.