DIVA and REPRO 1 & 5

[seangm]

What do you mean you cant hear the difference? Its plainly obvious that Hive 2 is better than Hive 2

No Hive 2 is better, stop gaslighting me

[mothra]

@zerocrossing

Are the zerocrossing that is usually at GS? GS website doesn’t work anymore, so good to see you here.

It was working a minute ago, but not now.
(Pretty sure someone had been DDoS'ing it the last few days, or maybe Meg Lee Chin is finally getting her revenge for what happened after she designed the entire site and got screwed)

[whatevs5000]

It’s a lame board now anyway. It’s the same 25 home musicians pretending to be “anonymous professionals”. KVR is a lot better. The old usenet was even better.

Thanks for replying.

[Lbdunequest]

repro and diva (and ACE) together have killed any desire to own analog synths anymore, and I have owned (and still do own) quite a few.

Repro in particular is absurdly good quality (and has a cpu cost to show for it unfortunately) but diva is obviously more flexible (high pass filter anyone?).

RePro played a part in my returning the Moog One within my 30 day window.

Joking aside, the Moog One is a profoundly different synth in pretty much every way. Dual filters, 3 VCOs, with wave shaping... 4 LFOs, and 3 envelopes, Eventide effects processor... I could go on, but you get it. I mean, I can understand not wanting to keep one, I passed on one when I had the cash, but RePro seems an odd replacement.

One of the things that keeps hardware in my world is that the successful emulations (like RePro) are lacking features of the synths I have. So, the Prophet 6 stays because of its high pass filter, sub oscillator, MPE, etc. Even my most basic analog, a Studio Electronics ATC-X, blows the pants off Diva by having an extra envelope generator. Seems silly, but you can do a lot with a spare EG, especially when you have a lot of exposed parameters. Then you start getting into things like my PolyBrute, and software can't even get in the ball park. Not and sound analog, at least, which may not be important to anyone else.

Hey, I'm using CLAP Diva at this point... I can add as many Envelopes as I want... or other modulators. It's like Diva Deluxe!

Regarding the Moog One, I didn't love the sound. It's not that RePro is a feature for feature replacement, but rather that I didn't like the sound of the Moog distinctly better... so why spend $8K! And that comparison was only a part of my decision. The bigger reason was the fan noise. Drove me nuts!

And as soon as CLAP RePro is out, RePro will have as much modulation as I want as well.

I love my analog gear too and have no plan on selling. If I absolutely had to pick between hardware and software, it would be software (Bazille)

And in the end Xfer Serum, Phase Plant, Massive X and Dune 3.5 blows them all out of the water while not being analog synths focused synths

[RugerioDelStereo]

Who are you trying to convince here, hebex?

Are you asking as a VST-cult member or as a fellow concerned?

yes

[RugerioDelStereo]

[hebex]

Who are you trying to convince here, hebex?

Go easy on him... he's just insecure cause so many analog synths are collecting dust while it's the plugins that get used.

I know one studio where they keep expensive analog gear where it's visible to customers... meanwhile the work gets done with software!

Maybe that says more about the laziness of some musicians, producers and engineers rather than their concern for what makes inspiring, soulful music worth listening to.

There are reasons why so much "music" played today is all but factory made, soulless and dead, made with, for and -- soon -- by computers.

Let me guess, you make tarnce, don´t you?

[Urs]

Wrong forum for you then. Unless, of course, you're just here to troll.

[hebex]

Wrong forum for you then. Unless, of course, you're just here to troll.

Wrong forum if I want VST-synths that really sound like the original lifeful and soulful analog hardware synthesizers they are advertised to digitally replicate? Wrong forum if I point out that, today, with the mentioned VST instruments, so is not the case?

Again, I´ve said in the past in this forum that VST instruments have come a long way and is getting better and better and, again, I´ve said many times that I for several reasons would love for them to, soundwise, be identical to the originals.

But are you, in this forum, only allowed to regard those VST-instruments as -- SOUNDWISE -- perfect digital replicas, or otherwise stay out?

[Urs]

Wrong forum for you then. Unless, of course, you're just here to troll.

Wrong forum if I want VST-synths that really sound like the original lifeful and soulful analog hardware synthesizers they are advertised to digitally replicate? Wrong forum if I point out that, today, with the mentioned VST instruments, so is not the case?

Again, I´ve said in the past in this forum that VST instruments have come a long way and is getting better and better and, again, I´ve said many times that I for several reasons would love for them to, soundwise, be identical to the originals.

But are you, in this forum, only allowed to regard those VST-instruments as -- SOUNDWISE -- perfect digital replicas, or otherwise stay out?

Gosh, you rave against computer based music production (and thus probably insulting the majority of people here) and then you get all whiny when you're called out about it?

[hebex]

Wrong forum for you then. Unless, of course, you're just here to troll.

Wrong forum if I want VST-synths that really sound like the original lifeful and soulful analog hardware synthesizers they are advertised to digitally replicate? Wrong forum if I point out that, today, with the mentioned VST instruments, so is not the case?

Again, I´ve said in the past in this forum that VST instruments have come a long way and is getting better and better and, again, I´ve said many times that I for several reasons would love for them to, soundwise, be identical to the originals.

But are you, in this forum, only allowed to regard those VST-instruments as -- SOUNDWISE -- perfect digital replicas, or otherwise stay out?

Gosh, you rave against computer based music production (and thus probably insulting the majority of people here) and then you get all whiny when you're called out about it?

No, I didn´t rave against computer based music production per se at all.

I just call those out who claim that the mentioned VST-instruments of today are -- SOUNDWISE -- perfect digital replicas of the original analog synthesizers.

Are you perhaps among those, Urs?

[Lbdunequest]

Wrong forum for you then. Unless, of course, you're just here to troll.

Wrong forum if I want VST-synths that really sound like the original lifeful and soulful analog hardware synthesizers they are advertised to digitally replicate? Wrong forum if I point out that, today, with the mentioned VST instruments, so is not the case?

Again, I´ve said in the past in this forum that VST instruments have come a long way and is getting better and better and, again, I´ve said many times that I for several reasons would love for them to, soundwise, be identical to the originals.

But are you, in this forum, only allowed to regard those VST-instruments as -- SOUNDWISE -- perfect digital replicas, or otherwise stay out?

Gosh, you rave against computer based music production (and thus probably insulting the majority of people here) and then you get all whiny when you're called out about it?

No, I didn´t rave against computer based music production per se at all.

I just call those out who claim that the mentioned VST-instruments of today are -- SOUNDWISE -- perfect digital replicas of the original analog synthesizers.

Are you perhaps among those, Urs?

I think he might be since he created prophet emulations.

[hebex]

Wrong forum for you then. Unless, of course, you're just here to troll.

Wrong forum if I want VST-synths that really sound like the original lifeful and soulful analog hardware synthesizers they are advertised to digitally replicate? Wrong forum if I point out that, today, with the mentioned VST instruments, so is not the case?

Again, I´ve said in the past in this forum that VST instruments have come a long way and is getting better and better and, again, I´ve said many times that I for several reasons would love for them to, soundwise, be identical to the originals.

But are you, in this forum, only allowed to regard those VST-instruments as -- SOUNDWISE -- perfect digital replicas, or otherwise stay out?

Gosh, you rave against computer based music production (and thus probably insulting the majority of people here) and then you get all whiny when you're called out about it?

No, I didn´t rave against computer based music production per se at all.

I just call those out who claim that the mentioned VST-instruments of today are -- SOUNDWISE -- perfect digital replicas of the original analog synthesizers.

Are you perhaps among those, Urs?

I think he might be since he created prophet emulations.

So, no potential for improvements then?

[Lbdunequest]

Wrong forum for you then. Unless, of course, you're just here to troll.

Wrong forum if I want VST-synths that really sound like the original lifeful and soulful analog hardware synthesizers they are advertised to digitally replicate? Wrong forum if I point out that, today, with the mentioned VST instruments, so is not the case?

Again, I´ve said in the past in this forum that VST instruments have come a long way and is getting better and better and, again, I´ve said many times that I for several reasons would love for them to, soundwise, be identical to the originals.

But are you, in this forum, only allowed to regard those VST-instruments as -- SOUNDWISE -- perfect digital replicas, or otherwise stay out?

Gosh, you rave against computer based music production (and thus probably insulting the majority of people here) and then you get all whiny when you're called out about it?

No, I didn´t rave against computer based music production per se at all.

I just call those out who claim that the mentioned VST-instruments of today are -- SOUNDWISE -- perfect digital replicas of the original analog synthesizers.

Are you perhaps among those, Urs?

I think he might be since he created prophet emulations.

So, no potential for improvements then?

What improvements if they sound perfect the way they are? Its your own subjective opinion aka do called souless vst synths and mindset that limits you.

[hebex]

Wrong forum if I want VST-synths that really sound like the original lifeful and soulful analog hardware synthesizers they are advertised to digitally replicate? Wrong forum if I point out that, today, with the mentioned VST instruments, so is not the case?

Again, I´ve said in the past in this forum that VST instruments have come a long way and is getting better and better and, again, I´ve said many times that I for several reasons would love for them to, soundwise, be identical to the originals.

But are you, in this forum, only allowed to regard those VST-instruments as -- SOUNDWISE -- perfect digital replicas, or otherwise stay out?

Gosh, you rave against computer based music production (and thus probably insulting the majority of people here) and then you get all whiny when you're called out about it?

No, I didn´t rave against computer based music production per se at all.

I just call those out who claim that the mentioned VST-instruments of today are -- SOUNDWISE -- perfect digital replicas of the original analog synthesizers.

Are you perhaps among those, Urs?

I think he might be since he created prophet emulations.

So, no potential for improvements then?

What improvements if they sound perfect the way they are? Its your own subjective opinion aka do called souless vst synths and mindset that limits you.

So, in your opinion, the mentioned VST-instruments are perfect digital replicas of the original analog synthesizers?