Waldorf Largo

[aMUSEd]

Download NI Komplete Kontrol. Largo has NKS, and the browsing works perfectly plus you get the audio previews. KK is free too. Best fix to the sucky Largo browser.

NKS is not working so far though on Apple Silicon in KK unfortunately

[aMUSEd]

double post

[Ex Machina]

I bought Largo from Native Instruments (huh?) for $70. I too thought it would be a Blofeld replacement. I absolutely love Largo's UI and think it's almost a work of art. It really is amazing how Waldorf was able to include that many synth parameters on a single screen.

But Largo has always had a piercing quality (especially when the resonance is turned up) that makes it less useful to me personally. I hadn't used Largo in years until I discovered these excellent presets collections from soundsdivine:

https://soundsdivine.com/product-tag/waldorf/

These presets are really impressive. All the evolving textures are quite amazing. Here's one of my favorites:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6PpN2ZBi_E

However, in the end I think I would prefer a Waldorf Q Rack or Micro Q over Largo and even Blofeld. As I understand it, Blofeld and Largo include much of the technology in the Q synthesizers. But these older Q hardware synths just sound beefier and punchier to me. I think their converters might be older and less hi-fi than those in the Blofeld. (That's just conjecture on my part.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzuXLNzRllY

In this Q Rack demo, the camera shows an orange colored Q Rack! I could have sworn it was a MicroWave II XT like the one I own. The orange color looks much better to me than the bright yellow.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nn6HHcrR-sw&t=270s

[EvilDragon]

I think their converters might be older and less hi-fi than those in the Blofeld. (That's just conjecture on my part.)

It's not the converters. It's just different algorithms. In case of Q itself, it's using 3 DSP chips instead of 1, so it has more horsepower to do more intricate algorithms.

[chk071]

However, in the end I think I would prefer a Waldorf Q Rack or Micro Q over Largo and even Blofeld. As I understand it, Blofeld and Largo include much of the technology in the Q synthesizers. But these older Q hardware synths just sound beefier and punchier to me. I think their converters might be older and less hi-fi than those in the Blofeld. (That's just conjecture on my part.)

You'll be happy to know (if you don't know already...) that the Motorola DSP project is working on emulating the Q at the moment. And, you can already play the microQ in the emulator (the Vavra plugin).

How much better can it get? We're absolutely spoiled these days.

[chk071]

It's not the converters. It's just different algorithms.

Yeah, I think the only thing the Blofeld and Largo share with the Q are the Q's wavetables and part of the layout. MicroWave, microQ, Q, Blofeld and Largo are very similar in terms of the synth's layout.

That said, the Blofeld and Largo have loads of different wavetables, own ones, and the ones from the PPG, microWave, microwave XT, Q etc.

[Ex Machina]

It's not the converters. It's just different algorithms. In case of Q itself, it's using 3 DSP chips instead of 1, so it has more horsepower to do more intricate algorithms.

Ah, thanks for the info. That makes sense. I don't know why I thought the Blofeld is a direct descendant of the Q Rack and Micro Q. I could have sworn I read somewhere that a Micro Q is essentially a rack mount Blofeld without the wavetable synthesis. But I guess not.

[Ex Machina]

Yeah, I think the only thing the Blofeld and Largo share with the Q are the Q's wavetables and part of the layout. MicroWave, microQ, Q, Blofeld and Largo are very similar in terms of the synth's layout.

That said, the Blofeld and Largo have loads of different wavetables, own ones, and the ones from the PPG, microWave, microwave XT, Q etc.

The MicroWave II and MicroWave II XT may have a somewhat similar architecture to the Q and Blofeld. But the original MicroWave I (which I own,) and the new Waldorf M are very different in how they handle modulation. There is no mod matrix. All the modulators are "local." For instance, the filter may have two freely assignable modulators in the filter module itself in addition to its hard wired controls such as a dedicated filter envelope and filter key tracking.

But all the Waldorf hardware synths are amazing in their own way. I also have an original Pulse 1 rack and a Pulse 2 desktop module. Other than maybe a Studio Electronics SE-3X, I can't think of better mono synths that allow you to store patches (and this includes the new Dreadbox Typhon, Moog Minitaur, Subsequent 25, and Subsequent 37).

[rod_zero]

Waldorf could deliver a great plugin based on their legacy, they really could have a stellar product, something like Diva but just waldorf modules. But i think they make more money in the HW world.

[chk071]

But i think they make more money in the HW world.

I guess so. Although the interest in the Motorola DSP emulation of the microQ tells me that they are interested in more plugins. The question is if they're interested enough to develop something themselves.

[Ex Machina]

I guess so. Although the interest in the Motorola DSP emulation of the microQ tells me that they are interested in more plugins. The question is if they're interested enough to develop something themselves.

It would be awesome if Waldorf released plugin versions of their legacy digital synths like the MicroWave II and Q. Those synths are digital so it shouldn't be impossible to create very accurate emulations.

If Korg has managed to do this with their legacy digital synths (M1, Wavestation, Triton, etc.) and their newer WaveState, opsix, and modWave hardware instruments, Waldorf should be able to follow suit.