u-he sale via iZotope

[aMUSEd]

OK great - I do actually have hand saved NKS patches for Bazille (and ACE) using my own template but they don't migrate to VST3 like the others do now. Maybe at least that is easier to fix? I know they are not optimal - they all use the same template and I'm hearing you would prefer to have different mappings depending on which modules are used (which I agree would be ideal) - but they are better than nothing and it would be nice to be able to use them again after the hard work of actually creating them in the first place.

[Tuskerfort]

When its done, do you plan to slap it onto Diva or a standalone like Repro?

I intend to add it to Diva *and* make it standalone.

Adding things to Diva may make them less obvious. For instance, gain staging... in Diva there's a difference if you use "Amplifier Volume" (voice parameter) or "Output" (global parameter). Only with Amplifier Volume cranked up fully you might get the typical Mini sound.

I have therefore thought about a concept I call "Diva Singles", which would have only ultra-faithful emulations of selected (as in: not all, rather few) synths. These would either be free with Diva (potentially a 2.0), or they'd be a separate thing. These would not be catering for mass usage, these would rather be there for reference. These would rather be mono synths. I don't know. It seems like a time consuming thing that may cost us more than we'd gain.

OTOH we always wanted to extend Repro with pun versions, like Repro-DG ("Re-Prodigy"), Repro-DC ("Repro-Odyssee"), Repro-BX ("Repro-OBX"), that kind of stuff.

But then of course, we'd rather love to get back to our concept of modelling the Cat. But that could also be part of... uhm, I don't know. Decisions, decisions.

So yes, there are numerous concepts of what we could do. We do have to think about commercial viability, I can't just pursue those out of personal ambition (vanity?).

For now (and for the next year or two) we're concentrating on Filterscape, Uhbik, TyrellN6 and Zebra 3.

I love hearing what you have in store. As a recent acquirer of Repro and a longtime lover of Zebra 2 (HZ) ... do you mind if I make suggestions?

I think what you learned about capturing idiosyncrasy in Repro is uniquely powerful (valuable) in the soft synth arena. A lot of us can patch roughly what we need, and there are professional soundsets which can get us close to what we want. However uniquely with Repro ... I feel as though the sound I end up with has a unique personality. It cuts through the sameness like an orange comet with blue tentacles seen flying over Paris. May I please encourage you to head in that direction?

Sure there is risk to investing in researching a particular synth, but perhaps there is also risk of sounding like the rest of a herd mooing the same sounds?

If you are doing something repro-ish in the future would you also consider this idea: Perhaps there is value in modeling a particular unit that is somewhat on the unstable/characterful side of a stable of units, where perhaps you get one or two good octaves but they are great. Perhaps there is a slider which morphs between this unstable/characterful unit and the better condition units? Wendy Carlos, while describing SOB, said that she was lucky to get a couple of good octaves with those moog oscillators sometimes. Sure it was troublesome but it had the character to light the musical imagination.

We can hear your hard work in the Repro ADSRs. It makes all the difference, enabling a simple sound to be magnificent.

[monophonK]

For now (and for the next year or two) we're concentrating on Filterscape, Uhbik, TyrellN6 and Zebra 3.

I hope not in that order ?

Some thing happen in parallel and/or leverage each other. For instance, the new filters in Filterscape are partially shared among Uhbik and Zebra3.

Most of Filterscape work is a makeover of UI and content. The UI needed a speed-up and improvement for the EQ-curves. Latter is leveraged for Uhbik and Zebra 3 as well.

Most leftover work of Uhbik 2 is the surround part, UI speed-up (EQ curve...) and some more refinements in UI design. One example: The new reverb algorithm is not surround-enabled yet, and the developer isn't working at u-he anymore. This is why we put Uhbik last of our main products after MFM and Filterscape.

TyrellN6 is mostly UI makeover, content makeover, and maintenance. New Preset browser and tagging, for instance. In an initial step there won't be any developers involved. Later on we want to also add a "pro" version with extra features, but we have no clear roadmap for this.

Now, as for Zebra3, if I hadn't also had to work on Satin (which turns out, needs me for another week or two before we can release it), I'd only be doing things that are only or partly useful for Zebra3. Anything that's necessary for MFM/Filterscape/Uhbik that is *not* possible to leverage for Zebra3 is done by other developers, or by the design and content teams.

Or, as someone once said, everything is somehow related to everything else, somehow, which again is somehow related to every other thing.

Hello Urs can you specify what the satin update will bring new. Thanks a lot

[Urs]

Hello Urs can you specify what the satin update will bring new. Thanks a lot

It is a bugfix where some settings could have audible sound differences at different samplerates. Like, when changing samplerates, the Emphasis parameter would have needed some adjustment. In order to rectify this, we had to scale and match the frequency response of dozens of virtual parts.

For backward compatibility and for existing projects, there'll be a way to either use those adjustments or stick to the unadjusted sound.

There's also an improvement for the visual analyser which now runs at a more or less fixed samplerate. It still does not properly visualise dynamic effects (distortion, compression), but the new method is a lot more consistent looking at different samplerates.

[monophonK]

Hello Urs can you specify what the satin update will bring new. Thanks a lot

It is a bugfix where some settings could have audible sound differences at different samplerates. Like, when changing samplerates, the Emphasis parameter would have needed some adjustment. In order to rectify this, we had to scale and match the frequency response of dozens of virtual parts.

For backward compatibility and for existing projects, there'll be a way to either use those adjustments or stick to the unadjusted sound.

There's also an improvement for the visual analyser which now runs at a more or less fixed samplerate. It still does not properly visualise dynamic effects (distortion, compression), but the new method is a lot more consistent looking at different samplerates.

Cool thanks for the extensive answer

[sircuit]

Hey, I have a question regarding this sale - my NI account is not registered with the same email address as my u-he plug-ins. If I were to buy something, will NI associate my email address I have with them to a u-he plugin? Asking because I'd like to have all licenses to one email address when retrieving them from u-he's website. Thanks!

[Chris-S]

I think your email addr @ NI is independant from that @ u-he.

[tasmaniandevil]

Asking because I'd like to have all licenses to one email address when retrieving them from u-he's website. Thanks!

When you enter your purchased code on our redeem page, you will also enter the name and email address you want to associate with the plugin.

[sacer]

Huh, I thought you liked the Legend at least.

The Legend is older than "the latest"

Thing is, emulation quality has *IMHO* gone down after Monark and The Legend, instead of building upon the status quo that was already reached.

I'm more thinking that nobody has done the MS-20 justice, which is why I push for that because Diva is probably my favorite thing that's close, but obviously misses the feedback and patching stuff. And to be honest the filters could be a little dirtier and screamier. I like the new Arturia MS-20 filters but the oscs are too dull and something is wrong with their oscs or envelopes that makes it sound like a compressor is on it.

I wouldn't mind a MS-20 either. I'm more into its predecessors though. We have two 770s, a vintage 700, a new 700s and an 800dv. Maybe a crossover of all of them.

Why not go one step further and do a subsequent 37 or voyager, instead of a good minimoog like softube and synapse audio already did, and probably gforce do?

[Urs]

Why not go one step further and do a subsequent 37 or voyager, instead of a good minimoog like softube and synapse audio already did, and probably gforce do?

Because my unhappiness is with Minimoog emulations. If there were ever any obligation to "preserve vintage gear in digital form" when creating these software emulations, I think we should be closer to this ideal today. But in respect of the most iconic synthesiser off all times, we are not. Instead, after a good start (Legend, Monark), the quality has deteriorated in favour of "bug free", moving straight towards irrelevance and misperception.

I do not know what is behind the thinking of those who come up with these "things". I hope it's not sloppiness, because of what that would mean to the rest of their catalogue. I guess it is an appeal to user expectation who do not know the original or do not want an authentic recreation. As such, it is purely a way to maximise profits over reputation. But then please don't lie in your advertisement about "every aspect meticulously blah blah". Because it's absolutely not.

I guess the rift between perception and reality bugs me.

[sacer]

Why not go one step further and do a subsequent 37 or voyager, instead of a good minimoog like softube and synapse audio already did, and probably gforce do?

Because my unhappiness is with Minimoog emulations. If there were ever any obligation to "preserve vintage gear in digital form" when creating these software emulations, I think we should be closer to this ideal today. But in respect of the most iconic synthesiser off all times, we are not. Instead, after a good start (Legend, Monark), the quality has deteriorated in favour of "bug free", moving straight towards irrelevance and misperception.

I do not know what is behind the thinking of those who come up with these "things". I hope it's not sloppiness, because of what that would mean to the rest of their catalogue. I guess it is an appeal to user expectation who do not know the original or do not want an authentic recreation. As such, it is purely a way to maximise profits over reputation. But then please don't lie in your advertisement about "every aspect meticulously blah blah". Because it's absolutely not.

I guess the rift between perception and reality bugs me.

Do you also count softube model 72 to these minis after the legend ? I never played a real Minimoog, but I prefer model72 and the legend over monark.
Also gforce minimonsta sounds really good, and I think they could raise the bar with v2 this year.
Xhun Audio littleone is very buggy, but it has a good sound too.

[Urs]

I'm not gonna mention names, but I guess the timeline is a giveaway.

I prefer Legend over Monark as well, even though I find Monark more accurately modelled, even if some of the rogue currents may be over the top and beyond my taste. However, Monark has a harsh side to it that non of the Minimoogs I have at my disposal exhibit.

[Urs]

That said, the most beautiful sounding Minimoog IMHO is the UAD one, even though it is among the least accurately modelled ones in my perception.

[masterhiggins]

Why not go one step further and do a subsequent 37 or voyager, instead of a good minimoog like softube and synapse audio already did, and probably gforce do?

Because my unhappiness is with Minimoog emulations. If there were ever any obligation to "preserve vintage gear in digital form" when creating these software emulations, I think we should be closer to this ideal today. But in respect of the most iconic synthesiser off all times, we are not. Instead, after a good start (Legend, Monark), the quality has deteriorated in favour of "bug free", moving straight towards irrelevance and misperception.

I do not know what is behind the thinking of those who come up with these "things". I hope it's not sloppiness, because of what that would mean to the rest of their catalogue. I guess it is an appeal to user expectation who do not know the original or do not want an authentic recreation. As such, it is purely a way to maximise profits over reputation. But then please don't lie in your advertisement about "every aspect meticulously blah blah". Because it's absolutely not.

I guess the rift between perception and reality bugs me.

Well, couldn’t the same thing be said about adding polyphony and velocity sensitivity and built-in fx to an emulation? All of those are things that fundamentally change the sound of a real minimoog, aren’t they? All of those are improvements that aren’t exactly “authentic.”

[Urs]

Well, as long as one can put it into a state that's supposedly how the original hardware works... I don't mind whatever they add, unless of course the resulting presets give a completely false impression.