Cherry Audio Releases Elka-X Synthesizer

[Chris-S]

Airwindows is not hardware.
https://www.airwindows.com/galactic/

[BrokenTrance]

yupp. have to create account to try the demo still. this synth went to the uninstall bin.

Thanks for your insightful response that now have dumbified the whole forum.

[rsaintjohn]

Is the Galactic reverb based on the Airwindows Galactic Reverb?

No, this came up in another post a few months back. It’s just an extended standalone version of the algorithm we called “Galactic” in Dreamsynth. Inspired by an older AMS and/or Lexicon IIRC (sorry, coffee has yet to kick in today, been a crazy week)

[sQeetz]

Can I make music like that after buying it?

The Synthex was not used on that album but the Synthex/Elka-X is powerfull enough for these kinds of analogish sounds.

Aww

[BBFG#]

Required iLok software to use Xils makes Cherry Audio the superior buy.

Yes iLok software protection changes the sound...

It does for many, since an iLok plug-in can't make a sound on a system it will never be installed on. And spamming a thread discussing their competition's products doesn't help either.

I was interested in a discussion about the products themselves, it's 100% natural to compare two Elka emulations. I guess it's predictable that with ANY mention of any product using even the software iLok, which is 100% the same in every way to any other copy protection at this point, at least here on my system, we have people like you raising your battle flag. Anyway I'm prolonging what I consider to be the actual spamming, since it has nothing at all to do with how the emulations sound, it has to do with personal bias.

I have nothing against iLok "as an option" for those wishing to use it. I had used it previously before I experienced their direct machinations and personally decided they're a company that I would avoid.
Other companies offer it but don't require it. e.g. iZotope.

It's the fact that certain companies raise their "battle flag" in justifying it first that simply causes those of us that have been victimized to it to respond.

I find it no coincidence that as this thread got "spammed" that a few other Xils threads got bumped almost simultaneously. Which is my pointing out that a generalized blast was yet again happening.

I merely pointed out that for me, I'm aware of that encroachment into other threads to raise their battle flags of competition.

This is a new product thread where the primary topic is that product. And my mention of their authorization is a direct response in saying CA has the better authorization in comparison to Xils. Which is every bit as valid as a discussion in sound and graphics.
(As for sound, I personally find Xils to be about equal. And in graphics, I more prefer the CA.)

MPO - Continuing to make this thread about Xils at this point is just an off topic narcissistic derailment that adds to my reasons to avoid the whole company.

And I ignore all those Xils threads being bumped. So if others are posting CA comparisons there, it's not me.

[vurt]

Required iLok software to use Xils makes Cherry Audio the superior buy.

Yes iLok software protection changes the sound...

It does for many, since an iLok plug-in can't make a sound on a system it will never be installed on. And spamming a thread discussing their competition's products doesn't help either.

I was interested in a discussion about the products themselves, it's 100% natural to compare two Elka emulations. I guess it's predictable that with ANY mention of any product using even the software iLok, which is 100% the same in every way to any other copy protection at this point, at least here on my system, we have people like you raising your battle flag. Anyway I'm prolonging what I consider to be the actual spamming, since it has nothing at all to do with how the emulations sound, it has to do with personal bias.

I have nothing against iLok "as an option" for those wishing to use it. I had used it previously before I experienced their direct machinations and personally decided they're a company that I would avoid.
Other companies offer it but don't require it. e.g. iZotope.

It's the fact that certain companies raise their "battle flag" in justifying it first that simply causes those of us that have been victimized to it to respond.

I find it no coincidence that as this thread got "spammed" that a few other Xils threads got bumped almost simultaneously. Which is my pointing out that a generalized blast was yet again happening.

I merely pointed out that for me, I'm aware of that encroachment into other threads to raise their battle flags of competition.

This is a new product thread where the primary topic is that product. And my mention of their authorization is a direct response in saying CA has the better authorization in comparison to Xils. Which is every bit as valid as a discussion in sound and graphics.
(As for sound, I personally find Xils to be about equal. And in graphics, I more prefer the CA.)

MPO - Continuing to make this thread about Xils at this point is just an off topic narcissistic derailment that adds to my reasons to avoid the whole company.

And I ignore all those Xils threads being bumped. So if others are posting CA comparisons there, it's not me.

you're both right.
xavier himself shouldn't post here, bad form. but other emus of the same synth are bound to be mentioned by users. happens in any emulation thread

[vurt]

by here, i mean this thread, not kvr.

[briefcasemanx]

No clue if it sounds accurate to the analog, but this softsynth sounds really cool!

[BlackWinny]

No clue if it sounds accurate to the analog

This point is always much more relative than one can think. When you read the comments made by professional musicians who endorse a product, it may be a clue telling that the accuracy is perfect. Their ear is certainly excellent, and I doubt that they endorse a product only for the money, and they don't need to endorse a product to make their fame, they already have the fame. In reality the accuracy of an emulation is never 100% perfect. It can't, for technical reasons. At the best we can reach perhaps 95%/98%. It is already very good! Whatever the developer. Even when the developer is himself the builder of the original hardware. So there are no real clues, each one must simply rely one's own ears to enjoy the product as it is. If we want the perfect accuracy there is no other solution than purchase the original hardware. And even that solution may lead to hazard due to the age of the analog components, each device of a said precise model aging differently. After 10 years all the devices of a said model have already begun to go in a different direction of aging, because the frequency of use, the temperature, the humidity, the way the controls are used, etc. And simply for chemical aging of the components themselves, whatever passive or active components (even transistors undergo aging, by the phenomenon called electro-diffusion between the two parts of the PN junction). Even using samples to believe to have the perfect accuracy will not bring the perfection.
And... actually... is it really so important to have 100% accuracy to the original? Do we try to imitate the bands and musicians of the 70's and 80's to the point of wanting to pretend that it is them who are playing our music? Or do we really compose musics that represent ourself, with our sounds, reminding the style and a bit the sounds of our adored musicians, certainly, (hence the purchase of emulations), but which is really ours?

[machinesworking]

(As for sound, I personally find Xils to be about equal. And in graphics, I more prefer the CA.)

nonsense, you just went on a rampage about not installing iLok software on your system, so you cannot possibly make any rational decision about the sound being equal between the two.

When a new DX7 emulation comes out I 100% expect to hear comparisons to FM8, Dexxed, DX7 V and any other emulations out there. There is one other emulation I know of of the Elka, so again all your talk about how it's spamming etc. is irrelevant. From what I recall this subform is called Instruments, not "Developer Marketplace". Spamming in this sense you make it to be is not happening by mentioning the only other emulation out there.

I'm sorry you had a nightmare with PACE, I can relate to that, but this isn't the PACE or copy protection subforum, or a thread about software protection schemes, you trying to control where and when people talk about competing products because of your personal experience OTOH is just....

[machinesworking]

No clue if it sounds accurate to the analog

This point is always much more relative than one can think. When you read the comments made by professional musicians who endorse a product, it may be a clue telling that the accuracy is perfect. Their ear is certainly excellent, and I doubt that they endorse a product only for the money, and they don't need to endorse a product to make their fame, they already have the fame. In reality the accuracy of an emulation is never 100% perfect. It can't, for technical reasons. At the best we can reach perhaps 95%/98%. It is already very good! Whatever the developer. Even when the developer is himself the builder of the original hardware. So there are no real clues, each one must simply rely one's own ears to enjoy the product as it is. If we want the perfect accuracy there is no other solution than purchase the original hardware. And even that solution may lead to hazard due to the age of the analog components, each device of a said precise model aging differently. After 10 years all the devices of a said model have already begun to go in a different direction of aging, because the frequency of use, the temperature, the humidity, the way the controls are used, etc. And simply for chemical aging of the components themselves, whatever passive or active components (even transistors undergo aging, by the phenomenon called electro-diffusion between the two parts of the PN junction). Even using samples to believe to have the perfect accuracy will not bring the perfection.
And... actually... is it really so important to have 100% accuracy to the original? Do we try to imitate the bands and musicians of the 70's and 80's to the point of wanting to pretend that it is them who are playing our music? Or do we really compose musics that represent ourself, with our sounds, reminding the style and a bit the sounds of our adored musicians, certainly, (hence the purchase of emulations), but which is really ours? qu'ils soient passif ou actif

Mostly, when a developer says they have an emulation of the hardware, I want it to be somewhat close. Some developers claim accuracy and are not even close at all. Aliasing happens in software that with analog hardware simply does not happen, so with all the claims by pros over the years about mediocre emulations I don't for a second buy into the idea they're a litmus test. A good portion of "pros" use only factory patches and patch libraries.

The digital elements of distortion on high notes or overdriven complex sounds in soft synths claiming to be emulations of old hardware has nothing to do with capturing some old time magic and more to do with wanting to get the tool for the job.

This is a DCO synth that's being emulated here though, people should keep that in mind.

[BBFG#]

(As for sound, I personally find Xils to be about equal. And in graphics, I more prefer the CA.)

nonsense, you just went on a rampage about not installing iLok software on your system, so you cannot possibly make any rational decision about the sound being equal between the two.

I'm sorry you had a nightmare with PACE, I can relate to that, but this isn't the PACE or copy protection subforum, or a thread about software protection schemes, you trying to control where and when people talk about competing products because of your personal experience OTOH is just....

1. Demos (and it is as subjective as I've continually stated.)
2. The only thing making this thread about iLok is the introduction of a competing product that requires it.

Remove it and maybe it could compare on all three fronts (Sound, Graphics, Authorization). But until then, all three are subjective and still valid. The only nonsense is continuing to keep this thread off the subject topic in favor of blasting the forum with bumps and mentions of something else anywhere possible.

Really says more about this plugin if it worries the competitor and its base enough to keep this line of attack going.

Ready to go back OT of this plugin?

[rsaintjohn]

1.0.5 Build 84 of Elka-X has just been released. It includes the following changes:
- Fixed unusual audio bleed-through bug when filter envelope release is longer than amp release
- Eliminated a defect where effects were utilizing CPU resources when no audio was playing through them

[machinesworking]

(As for sound, I personally find Xils to be about equal. And in graphics, I more prefer the CA.)

nonsense, you just went on a rampage about not installing iLok software on your system, so you cannot possibly make any rational decision about the sound being equal between the two.

I'm sorry you had a nightmare with PACE, I can relate to that, but this isn't the PACE or copy protection subforum, or a thread about software protection schemes, you trying to control where and when people talk about competing products because of your personal experience OTOH is just....

1. Demos (and it is as subjective as I've continually stated.)
2. The only thing making this thread about iLok is the introduction of a competing product that requires it.

Remove it and maybe it could compare on all three fronts (Sound, Graphics, Authorization). But until then, all three are subjective and still valid. The only nonsense is continuing to keep this thread off the subject topic in favor of blasting the forum with bumps and mentions of something else anywhere possible.

Really says more about this plugin if it worries the competitor and its base enough to keep this line of attack going.

Ready to go back OT of this plugin?

You conveniently left out the absolute most salient point to make your conspiratorial point.

When a new DX7 emulation comes out I 100% expect to hear comparisons to FM8, Dexxed, DX7 V and any other similar emulations out there. There is one other emulation I know of of the Elka, so again all your talk about how it's spamming etc. is irrelevant.

Strange how that works right? the part that says people have a right to compare similar plug ins, it's how it works. The next Minimoog emulation released will have references to all the other Mini emulations, not any mystery here at all.

[BBFG#]

(As for sound, I personally find Xils to be about equal. And in graphics, I more prefer the CA.)

nonsense, you just went on a rampage about not installing iLok software on your system, so you cannot possibly make any rational decision about the sound being equal between the two.

I'm sorry you had a nightmare with PACE, I can relate to that, but this isn't the PACE or copy protection subforum, or a thread about software protection schemes, you trying to control where and when people talk about competing products because of your personal experience OTOH is just....

1. Demos (and it is as subjective as I've continually stated.)
2. The only thing making this thread about iLok is the introduction of a competing product that requires it.

Remove it and maybe it could compare on all three fronts (Sound, Graphics, Authorization). But until then, all three are subjective and still valid. The only nonsense is continuing to keep this thread off the subject topic in favor of blasting the forum with bumps and mentions of something else anywhere possible.

Really says more about this plugin if it worries the competitor and its base enough to keep this line of attack going.

Ready to go back OT of this plugin?

You conveniently left out the absolute most salient point to make your conspiratorial point.

When a new DX7 emulation comes out I 100% expect to hear comparisons to FM8, Dexxed, DX7 V and any other similar emulations out there. There is one other emulation I know of of the Elka, so again all your talk about how it's spamming etc. is irrelevant.

Strange how that works right? the part that says people have a right to compare similar plug ins, it's how it works. The next Minimoog emulation released will have references to all the other Mini emulations, not any mystery here at all.

It wasn't important since I didn't say "you had no right", but made the point I also had that right in pointing out that authorization is just as much something to consider in comparison.

And to the effect that what I felt was an okay synth that I wouldn't buy because of that "X___" authorization is now setting in my mind as a "drink the Koolaid" company.

Too much time spent on this now.
We both made our points pages ago.
Time to let it go.
If all you're here for is to shill "X___", maybe move on to their threads.

I'll keep scanning Cherry Audio threads and ignoring 'X___" threads.