Satin 1.3.3 RC4 15721 & Filterscape 1.5.1 RC1 15664

[Mercado_Negro]

Also, there's a small glitch when UI size is set to any other size that's different from 100%. When clicking on the insert slot to show the UI the plug-in comes up cropped for a second and then resizes to the correct size you set.

[Weasel-Boy]

Can't duplicate your observation on the Mac platform for either Filterscape or Satin....which brings me to this question: which plug-in are you talking about?

[Mercado_Negro]

Can't duplicate your observation on the Mac platform for either Filterscape or Satin....which brings me to this question: which plug-in are you talking about?

I reported two bugs (there's another post before the one you read). Both with Satin. This is on Sonoma 14.3.1. MacBook Pro M1 8GB/256GB. ProTools 2024.3

[tasmaniandevil]

In ProTools 2024.3 when copying a Satin instance from one track to another the grouping is not copied.

The group settings are not part of the parameters which are stored within the preset.
Most hosts will copy all parameters when duplicating a plugin.
Pro Tools seems to only copy the actual preset parameters.

[tasmaniandevil]

When clicking on the insert slot to show the UI the plug-in comes up cropped for a second and then resizes to the correct size you set.

I'm not sure if this is something we can improve. But we'll look into it.

[Weasel-Boy]

I reported two bugs (there's another post before the one you read). Both with Satin. This is on Sonoma 14.3.1. MacBook Pro M1 8GB/256GB. ProTools 2024.3

My setup: Sonoma 14.4.1. MacBook Pro M1 32GB/2TB. Cubase 13.0.30. Only major difference I see is that I'm using Cubase and you're running ProTools. I don't see the issue with Satin running less than a 100% UI view. Could be a ProTools issue?

[tasmaniandevil]

Could be a ProTools issue?

What he reported are both Pro Tools specific quirks.

[gauderbock]

Hi, the bypass doesn't "stick" on my Satin RC4 Clap, Linux Reaper. The VST2 and VST3 versions are both fine.

[MrJubbly]

Hi,

As you may be aware, FL Studio is currently undergoing public beta testing for their next upcoming update, which is set to offer CLAP support.

Currently, the plugin manager for the latest "FL Studio 2024.1 Beta 4" is not locating CLAP formats for either "FilterscapeVA" (synth) or "FilterscapeQ6" (effect) during its verified plugin scans.

It only discovers the CLAP format of the single "Filterscape" effect plugin.

CLAP - FilterscapeVA and FilterscapeQ6 not recognized in FL Studio 2024.1 Beta 4.png

The VST3 version of these same plugins is a single file: "Filterscape(x64).vst3" which when scanned with "Verify Plugins" enabled, is subsequently detected as 3 separate plugins: 1 generator: "FilterscapeVA" and 2 effect plugins: "Filterscape" and "FilterscapeQ6".

The VST3 versions scan correctly and identify thOSE 3 separate plugins from that single VST3 file.

I suspect something similar is supposed to occur with the single CLAP file: "Filterscape.clap". However, currently, FL Studio's plugin manager is only correctly detecting the single effect plugin: "Filterscape". While the other two plugins are missing in CLAP format.

Can any u-he developers offer any advice on how to possibly resolve this issue?

Tested with:
Filterscape 1.5.1 (revision 15664)
FL Studio 2024.1 Beta 4
Windows 11 23H2 Build 22631.3296

Link to my bug report on Image-Line's forum, if someone at u-he would like to comment there. Or alternatively, I can pass on any helpful information received.

[Urs]

I'm sure they'll figure it out

We seem to be one of the very few companies which do these multi-component plug-in binaries.

[tasmaniandevil]

Hi, the bypass doesn't "stick" on my Satin RC4 Clap, Linux Reaper. The VST2 and VST3 versions are both fine.

Yes, we noticed this too. It's a Reaper exclusive issue, we just didn't have the time yet to figure out if it's something we can fix or if it's up to Reaper to improve in their CLAP implementation.
As a workaround you can use Reaper's bypass checkbox, which is connected to Satin's bypass button.
We've mentioned this in the release notes of the 1.3.3 update:
https://u-he.com/products/satin/releasenotes.html

[DrWashington]

This may be a bit of a tangent (sorry), but I'd sure like Satin to be able to emulate old cassette decks, particularly boomboxes from the '80s, exceptionally well. This is an effect I'd really use for intros and such. I have quite a number of tape emulations at this point, but none of them really do this. IK's Tascam Portastudio one comes closest.

I can handle the speaker IR portion of this with other plugins, but it'd be nice if some of that was baked in for a future update. Satin sounds marvelous and I love its current flexibility, but it'd be very cool if it covered the whole gamut of Walkmans, boomboxes, Nakamichi cassette decks, the whole nine.

Love your work and it was great talking to Urs & Howard at NAMM. You're very gracious with your knowledge!

[sascha]

This is just from memory, but AFAIR the optimal operational range of the tape model algorithm was as low as 4.something ips. I tried 3.75ips (double cassette tape speed, like some multitrackers did) back then and it went a bit out of proportion, but now as you see the plug-in even offers 1.875ips you could theoretically do domestic tape emulation. The model is leaving its optimal range there, but all the 'real' ones were all different from manufacturer to manufacturer anyway, and from tape brand to tape brand.

There's demand for lo-fi sounds, no question. But I think this can be achieved with IRs (for complete boombox repro, including speakers, for instances), ping/brown noise, 2 types of lfo (wow & scrape flutter) and frequency-dependent saturation including that high-frequency smear (latter needs oversampling). At least putting more effort into low-speed and additional lo-fi attributes would have jeopardized Satin's product scope and its core assets.

My personal low was usage of a Fostex 280 in the band, which had immense wow & flutter although it ran on 3.75ips. Even a Walkman on low battery would have provided better tonal stability. When we paired it with a TSR-8 1/2" (using the giant TASCAM Midiizer sync unit) the jitter was causing erratic behaviour, and the crosstalk of the MTC signal on track 4 restricted usage of its neighbour track to bass guitar... and the built-in mixer was bloody awful. We made demos nonetheless, and they brought us gigs. (Which is ironic as today you don't get gigs although you're on Spotify... but that's OT.)

I never used a Nakamichi (Dragon?) myself, but at ~10k (Deutschmarks) it was out of most people's reach. But I did work with a lot of good tape decks in the 90s, like Revox B215, Akai GX75 and the top-of-the-range TEAC decks (latter using dbx). Those machines were advertised to sound as close as possible to CD, and what you got there was astounding, provided the technical challenges. Generally, everybody was shooting for hi-fi/hi-end and maximum clarity back then. Which is what you can actually achieve using Satin, using the same technical aspects. You might want to twist the knobs until you're leaving the plug-in's sweet spot and might end in domestic tape territory but it would perhaps still sound quite flattering, and not 'broken' enough. But maybe then it's just the wrong tool for the job.