What vst sounds closest to the Virus TI?

[Dencheg]

Viper is the one. Get yourself a windows machine, it's worth it

[Gam456]

Presumably, if you have the firmware legally (ofc) and up to date this VST would sound even better.

As others said, there is some difference between Viper and the Virus, but in the grand scheme of things it doesnt matter, 90 plus % of patches will sound almost identical.
Here are two videos, one where I compare Viper to the Virus, and one where I import Virus patches. Feel free to judge the sound for yourself, and if its close to the Virus or not

I noticed if I export a preset from Osirus as a midi file
Viper can't find the wavetable. But Viper can see the factory folder.

[ghostwhistler]

Viper is the one. Get yourself a windows machine, it's worth it

I have a windows machine.
I don't have the spare £££ at this time.
Maybe when hundreds of people buy my work (or at least 75 people paying precisely £1 each, which, on reflection, doesn't seem quite so unreasonable )

Another time, Highlander

[ghostwhistler]

Presumably, if you have the firmware legally (ofc) and up to date this VST would sound even better.

As others said, there is some difference between Viper and the Virus, but in the grand scheme of things it doesnt matter, 90 plus % of patches will sound almost identical.
Here are two videos, one where I compare Viper to the Virus, and one where I import Virus patches. Feel free to judge the sound for yourself, and if its close to the Virus or not

Sounds good enough to me. I'm not precious about these things anyway. I don't care about owning hardware that costs ten times the price when software is much more efficient. Others may (incorrectly) disagree. I'll save up my pennies

[adamszabo]

I noticed if I export a preset from Osirus as a midi file
Viper can't find the wavetable. But Viper can see the factory folder.

Its because you didnt download the free virus waves from vipers webpage, or you have them in an incorrect location

[zerocrossing]

I'm aware that there is a vst emulation of sorts, but you have to own the firmware for the hardware synth. That is not freely nor legitimately available.

Is there anything comparable?

It's an emualtion of the DSP not the Virus.
If you find the Virus TI Installer 5.1.7, you will find the firmware.

Honestly, I think most modern plugins sound a lot better, so just look at the big wavetable plugins and pick the ones that you like best. Massive X, Dune 3, Icarus, Spire, etc. they’re all great.

Virus Ti still have some aliasing in certains circumstances. But it remain unique.
I have Ostirus, Spire, Rapid, Pigment, Spire, Dune, Omnisphere, Falcon,Halion and many others...
You know what? I keep the hardware.

Whatever floats your boat.

[zerocrossing]

Ostirus is NOT modelled, you are playing the real Virus

Minus the DAC

I’m of the mind that the “it’s the DAC” are suffering from confirmation bias, and the DACs of that era do not significantly contribute to the character of the Virus.

[IvyBirds]

Not to play "devil's advocate" BUT......a hardware synth is more than just a cpu chip running DSP. Things like DA converters can play a role in the actual sound. Even in hardware synths from the same company that can share sysex patches. For instance, to my ears, A Yamaha DX21 sounds a bit smoother than a TX81Z which, (again to my ears), sounds a bit more raw and gritty. I prefer the TX81Z for that reason. I also find the same holds true for VSTi's like FM8 DiscoDSP phantom which can import those same 4op FM sysex patches. And it's why I still own a TX81Z.

But hey, that's just me......YMMV.

That was true for 1980s Synths that used bespoke DACs and low bit depth and sample rates like the TX81Z, but once we hit the late 1990s they used off the shelf DACs and 16 Bit 44.k or better converters they got from the HiFi Stereo/CD/DVD market and they were very clean and transparent

You never hear anyone say anything about the DAC in the Panasonic DVD player sounding any different than the one in the Sony DVD player

The Access Virus line used all off the shelf components right down the to the Motorola CPU

It's literally just a computer running code that outputs digital audio that then gets converted by a clean and transparent DAC

It's because of this fact that the emulators work just by running the firmware and a GUI that emulates the control surface of the hardware

Samplers from the era used different data compression schemes which can have an impact on sound but if you were to run their firmware in an emulator you would also be running that data compression scheme

Well, quite debatable. Most people who own those machines will tell you something slightly different.
https://gearspace.com/board/electronic- ... sound.html

Only it's not debatable at all, because it's a fact and people on GearSlutz will always say hardware sounds better. It's called confirmation bias

The Virus ran an off the shelf Motorola CPU and used off the shelf DACs made for home stereos

There is no mojo in the hardware, it's all software

[Gam456]

I noticed if I export a preset from Osirus as a midi file
Viper can't find the wavetable. But Viper can see the factory folder.

Its because you didnt download the free virus waves from vipers webpage, or you have them in an incorrect location

I can see in the OSC

viper.jpg

[Gam456]

Ostirus is NOT modelled, you are playing the real Virus

Minus the DAC

I’m of the mind that the “it’s the DAC” are suffering from confirmation bias, and the DACs of that era do not significantly contribute to the character of the Virus.

The analog output run at 88.2/96 khz, usb at 44.1/48khz
Obviously, there is a difference. Is it a game changer? No. Does in matter? No

[IvyBirds]

Ostirus is NOT modelled, you are playing the real Virus

Minus the DAC

But the DAC is off the shelf there is nothing there to model. It's not early and mid 1980s technology with low bit rates and low sample rates. The Virus runs at 24 bits and 194kHz. It does that specifically to be as transparent and colorless as possible

You have a transparent DAC in your computer soundcard and/or Audio Interface that is just as transparent and boring as the DAC in a virus

All a DAC does is turn digital code into analog voltages that can then be amplified to drive speakers. In the 1980s DACs were expensive and hard to come by. Synthesizer manufacturers had to build their own to save costs and to ensure they would work with their digital coding of their often bespoke CPU/DSP chip designs

That all began to change with the mass market adoption of digital audio devices for the home stereo/HiFi market especially CD Players, then with DAT and DVD players

At the same time there was a standardization with digital audio codecs and DACs to support the plug and connectivity of optical digital components

In particular as mentioned earlier the Access Virus TI has 192kHz convertors with SPDIF optical outputs that is as clean and transparent as you can get

Please explain how you model that DAC and what you think you will achieve? What would be the point?

[Uncle E]

I’m of the mind that the “it’s the DAC” are suffering from confirmation bias, and the DACs of that era do not significantly contribute to the character of the Virus.

I was guilty of buying into the DAC being a factor with Nord Lead 2 vs 2X. Now we have the plugin and it's everything I love about the 2.

[Gam456]

In particular as mentioned earlier the Access Virus TI has 192kHz convertors with SPDIF optical outputs that is as clean and transparent as you can get

The ESAI audio interface has the following setup:

44,1 KHz or 48 KHz
2 channels per port

The ESAI_1 audio interface is setup in a different way:

88,2 KHz or 96 KHz
3 channels per port

https://dsp56300.wordpress.com/virus-c- ... formation/

[IvyBirds]

In particular as mentioned earlier the Access Virus TI has 192kHz convertors with SPDIF optical outputs that is as clean and transparent as you can get

The ESAI audio interface has the following setup:

44,1 KHz or 48 KHz
2 channels per port

The ESAI_1 audio interface is setup in a different way:

88,2 KHz or 96 KHz
3 channels per port

https://dsp56300.wordpress.com/virus-c- ... formation/

Read the actual documentation from Access.

The Virus TI offers

"6 balanced outputs with +4 dB level and soft limiting algorithm. Studio grade 192 khz D/A converters with S/PDIF digital I/O. 2x24 bit inputs. Surround sound capabilities. The Virus TI Snow has 2 un-balanced outputs and no SPDIF I/O."

https://www.virus.info/virusti/specs

The Virus TI DAC is a Freescale Symphony DSP56724 Multi-Core Audio
Processor. (They are documented extensively on the net)

It's running at 192khz sample rate as that is what the CPU is sending it. That outputs multiple digital audio streams at various sample rates on multiple ports at the same time

At the end of the day none of that really matters as there is no magic, mojo, juju, rainbows, unicorns, leprechauns, or fairy dust in that DAC. It's a transparent DAC running at high bit depth and sample rates designed originally for multitrack digital audio for the Digital Playback of movies

There is zero reason to emulate it

[jens]

Ostirus is NOT modelled, you are playing the real Virus

Minus the DAC

I’m of the mind that the “it’s the DAC” are suffering from confirmation bias, and the DACs of that era do not significantly contribute to the character of the Virus.

I think you're putting something in their mouth here which they never said.

The "minus the DAC" statement is factually correct.

You aside*, so far nobody seems to be interested in discussing the DAC's relevance though.


*edit: I should have read the thread until its current end first - actually there's others who are apparently keen on discussing the DAC too.