Arturia Jup-8000 V

[Hyperbole]

If you mean there is shared core functionality such as sample playback, some of the filters, and some of the modulation sources and effects, then that's most likely true and is common sense. However, to claim that these as well as Jup-8000 in particular are "based on Pigments" in the context of the statements made earlier implying that they simply made a new GUI on top of Pigments with a few minor tweaks and gave it a new name is a silly conspiracy theory.

TAE is most likely a component-modeling framework similar to that used by other companies, such as Softube (there was an article about theirs years ago) and probably every other major plug-in maker, in which common infrastructure and algorithms are shared. If you implement an anti-aliasing algorithm or a modulation source or a diode behavior or whatever once, it makes sense to make it modular and reuse it. That's not the same thing as plopping a new GUI onto Pigments, tweaking the filter a little, and calling it a JP-8000 emulation.

It all depends on what you consider "minor tweaks." I can almost guarantee you that envelope shapes and so forth are configurable elements within the code. It would be insane to "hard code" such things.

So if the supersaw waveform had already been coded for Pigments that would leave the JP8000 filter model, which is likely new, and a few additional bits and bobs. The bottom line is that by building on the Pigments codebase, Arturia almost certainly saved themselves considerable time and effort. Was it simply a matter of "tweaking a few things" under the hood and slapping a new GUI on top? No, of course not. I assume a fair amount of work went into adjusting the Pigments engine to better mimic the behavior (envelope times, velocity response, etc.) of the JP8000. But this is absolutely not a brand new synth. Given the number of synth emulations they need to support, Arturia would go out of business if they took that approach.

[bonch]

No, but the manner in which all leading software is developed (and how all successful software businesses are run) indicates that you don't know what you are talking about.

You might want to leave this to people with experience in such matters. Otherwise, you'll continue to sound ignorant and foolish.

You're trying sooo hard to rationalize a goofy conspiracy theory. The condescending comments about my experience are meaningless; I have long years of firsthand experience in software development, as do many others here most likely, and there's nothing special about that and certainly nothing special about me for having such experience. Frankly, you're trying to make this personal for no good reason, and that won't save the argument.

We can see through the schtick. You're trying to equate the concept of shared low-level components in a framework like TAE/TMT/Softube's/whatever with that of "reskinning" an existing plug-in and selling it as a new product in an attempt to critique Jup-8000. And it's really based on nothing: someone thinks the supersaw sounds the same.

U-he's Diva incorporates a new voice stealing algorithm taken from Hive. Does that mean Diva is "based on Hive?" This is silly stuff.

Was it simply a matter of "tweaking a few things" under the hood and slapping a new GUI on top? No, of course not.

That's what I've been saying, ya silly goose!

Your statements about "adjusting the Pigments engine" suggest a serious misunderstanding how these things are put together. These are collections of algorithms built on a component-modeling framework shared across their product line. It's not like Pigments is a game engine that's powering all their synths behind the scenes, and they're just modding the underlying engine with new assets to make new products.

I think the reason you're fixated on Pigments in particular is because it acts as a sort of showcase for many of their technologies, so it happens to have a lot of them that appear elsewhere. Beyond that, there's nothing particularly special about Pigments in terms of powering their emulations because it's not a "synth engine." In other words, you're focused on the wrong thing when it's really about the family of technologies they market as TAE.

If Pigments has a supersaw algorithm inspired by the JP-8000 that makes sense to re-use for a full-fledged JP-8000 project, it's sensible to reuse that, but that doesn't mean the new product is somehow powered by Pigments behind the scenes. That concept doesn't really make sense and is a misunderstanding of the relationship between the products and the frameworks they're using. In other words, it's not that Jup-8000 is somehow powered by Pigments or running on it like a game engine but that Pigments and Jup-8000 and all the rest of their products are drawing from the company's shared modeling frameworks. Nearly all the major plug-in makers do this.

[dlandis]

No, but the manner in which all leading software is developed (and how all successful software businesses are run) indicates that you don't know what you are talking about.

You might want to leave this to people with experience in such matters. Otherwise, you'll continue to sound ignorant and foolish.

You're trying sooo hard to rationalize a goofy conspiracy theory. The condescending comments about my experience are meaningless; I have long years of firsthand experience in software development, as do many others here most likely, and there's nothing special about that and certainly nothing special about me for having such experience. Frankly, you're trying to make this personal for no good reason, and that won't save the argument.

We can see through the schtick. You're trying to equate the concept of shared low-level components in a framework like TAE/TMT/Softube's/whatever with that of "reskinning" an existing plug-in and selling it as a new product in an attempt to critique Jup-8000. And it's really based on nothing: someone thinks the supersaw sounds the same.

U-he's Diva incorporates a new voice stealing algorithm taken from Hive. Does that mean Diva is "based on Hive?" This is silly stuff.

Gentlemen, Arturia does maintain a forum on KVR. Would not this discussion (and any further questions that pertain to the development of Arturia's plugins) be better served over in that forum where Arturia's representatives can potentially answer these questions directly? I say this because you all seem to have hit something of a wall here in this forum.

[bonch]

I'm afraid Arturia's staff are too busy modding the "Pigments engine." I think this discussion belongs here, though. It's a claim being made about Jup-8000, and it's the sort of non-technical laymen's claim that gets caught up in the wind and spreads across the internet as unfounded conventional wisdom when unchallenged.

[Lbdunequest]

I'm afraid Arturia's staff are too busy modding the "Pigments engine." I think this discussion belongs here, though. It's a claim being made about Jup-8000, and it's the sort of non-technical laymen's claim that gets caught up in the wind and spreads across the internet as unfounded conventional wisdom when unchallenged.

Have you compared pigments supersaw with jup 8000? Its identical

[IvyBirds]

In other words, it's not that Jup-8000 is somehow powered by Pigments or running on it like a game engine but that Pigments and Jup-8000 and all the rest of their products are drawing from the company's shared modeling frameworks. Nearly all the major plug-in makers do this.

Not entirely they have TAE, and they have something else not TAE that drives Pigments Which is exactly what I have been saying when you are not spreading conspiracy theories about what I said by deliberately leaving out things I said

We know that Analog Lab somehow is able to run presets of Synths that are not installed on your computer, you can even run JP-8000v presets when that was never installed on your computer

That would indicate that it's not new and is an existing synth engine of some sort. We know that Arturia has TAE and brags about using it in all the marketing for synths that use it. Even I the remade SEM. In the marketing for Jup-8000v there is no mention of TAE yet the fact that the presets for it exist in Analog Lab would indicate that there is not a new synth engine behind it

We also know that Pigments was a new proprietary software program not built in TAE, it's been expanded many times with new synthesis engines and features. New things are built for the Pigments engine that drive Pigments.

This "Pigments Framework" is being reused in Augmented, there is no doubt as you can see the fingerprints of it all over all the Augmented instruments, you can also see them in Jup-8000V and Pure Lofi

And as I said before which you continue to misquote is

"What Arturia did was to take Pigments and change the GUI to strip out everything from Pigments that wasn't needed to emulate a JP-8000. Then they tweaked the envelope a touch and tweaked the "classic" filter from Pigments a bit, or just made a new one that kinda sorta sounds like the one in the JP-8000"

You don't need the additive engine from Pigments for a JP-8000 so it's not there. My guess is that they are using Wavetables however and there is a pretty nice Wavetable engine in Pigments. There is a pretty good envelope generator in Pigments that just needed some tweaks to behave like the envelopes in the JP-8000, and then they tweaked an existing filter or made a new one

The modulations in Pigments are quite nice, the ones in the Jup-8000 V are all easily done with the Pigments engine

[Lbdunequest]

Pigments has VA engine, with super unison

[bonch]

Have you compared pigments supersaw with jup 8000? Its identical

If it is, so what? That wouldn't be a surprise since the Pigments manual says the Super unison mode is intended to sound like "the famous 'JP' supersaw."

We know that Analog Lab somehow is able to run presets of Synths that are not installed on your computer, you can even run JP-8000v presets when that was never installed on your computer

That would indicate that it's not new and is an existing synth engine of some sort.

We know that Arturia has TAE and brags about using it in all the marketing for synths that use it. Even I the remade SEM. In the marketing for Jup-8000v there is no mention of TAE yet the fact that the presets for it exist in Analog Lab would indicate that there is not a new synth engine behind it

I hope you're aware Analog Lab received an update:



But maybe this explanation from Arturia's product manager will shed light (emphasis mine):

Without going into too much detail, that’s pretty much how it works; our hardware instruments/effects emulations are emulated on a component level, but there will be different DSP techniques involved depending on the components and circuits themselves, and TAE covers all our different approaches and techniques to achieve the best results. The complete emulated circuit (for the whole synth/effect) is a unique Audio Engine that is then housed in a shared interface (for the browser, tutorials, FX rack, settings etc) but with its own dedicated GUI.

Analog Lab is updated with each new product release to include the complete Audio Engine for the new release, so that it’s able to play the presets and respond to mappings etc. When you switch through presets for different synth emulations in Analog Lab, you are literally loading completely different engines, but it’s all pretty seamless because it’s deeply integrated.

Pigments’ Audio Engine is really quite different given that it’s not an emulation. It builds on a lot of DSP and Software expertise we’ve developed over the years of course, but it’s its own thing altogether. So it can do a lot more than our emulations, but it’s also not designed to emulate a specific circuit (though we do have some specific filter models built-in etc.). The only thing it really shares with any of the VCollection is the shared interface I mentioned earlier for browsing etc.

Hope this clarifies things a bit!

Cedric (Product Manager @Arturia)

Not that this will convince conspiracy theorists.

[frag]

I believe the JUP-8000v does in fact sound like the JP-8000. I know it does because I have compared it to my JP-8080. You can hear it for yourself in Sean Tyas’s patch demo. That right there is the sound of the JP and it is unmistakable. But there’s definitely room for another (multiplatform) developer to give this a shot – add the dual layers, sysex import, be faithful to the synth’s quirks. I'd be all over that and it would quickly make me forget about Arturia's.

Arturia can fix these shortcomings with one or two updates, if they wanted.

Can you replicate a regular brass patch, or pop/rock lead from 8080?
Obviously, this is not easy, but it would give us much better perspective on 8000 V.

Arturia Factory bank is more like Trance bank. It's a shame they didn't try to replicate factory presets, I hear the synth is very close to original and it can do so much more.
Factory presets are very much "narrow minded"...
The video I posted earlier shows what JP can really do:
viewtopic.php?p=9075454#p9075454

[IvyBirds]

Have you compared pigments supersaw with jup 8000? Its identical

If it is, so what? That wouldn't be a surprise since the Pigments manual says the Super unison mode is intended to sound like "the famous 'JP' supersaw."

We know that Analog Lab somehow is able to run presets of Synths that are not installed on your computer, you can even run JP-8000v presets when that was never installed on your computer

That would indicate that it's not new and is an existing synth engine of some sort.

We know that Arturia has TAE and brags about using it in all the marketing for synths that use it. Even I the remade SEM. In the marketing for Jup-8000v there is no mention of TAE yet the fact that the presets for it exist in Analog Lab would indicate that there is not a new synth engine behind it

I hope you're aware Analog Lab received an update:



But maybe this explanation from Arturia's product manager will shed light (emphasis mine):

Without going into too much detail, that’s pretty much how it works; our hardware instruments/effects emulations are emulated on a component level, but there will be different DSP techniques involved depending on the components and circuits themselves, and TAE covers all our different approaches and techniques to achieve the best results. The complete emulated circuit (for the whole synth/effect) is a unique Audio Engine that is then housed in a shared interface (for the browser, tutorials, FX rack, settings etc) but with its own dedicated GUI.

Analog Lab is updated with each new product release to include the complete Audio Engine for the new release, so that it’s able to play the presets and respond to mappings etc. When you switch through presets for different synth emulations in Analog Lab, you are literally loading completely different engines, but it’s all pretty seamless because it’s deeply integrated.

Pigments’ Audio Engine is really quite different given that it’s not an emulation. It builds on a lot of DSP and Software expertise we’ve developed over the years of course, but it’s its own thing altogether. So it can do a lot more than our emulations, but it’s also not designed to emulate a specific circuit (though we do have some specific filter models built-in etc.). The only thing it really shares with any of the VCollection is the shared interface I mentioned earlier for browsing etc.

Hope this clarifies things a bit!

Cedric (Product Manager @Arturia)

Not that this will convince conspiracy theorists.

Awesome yet that is specifically talking about TAE.

"TAE covers all our different approaches and techniques to achieve the best results. The complete emulated circuit (for the whole synth/effect) is a unique Audio Engine that is then housed in a shared interface (for the browser, tutorials, FX rack, settings etc) but with its own dedicated GUI"

But Jup-8000 V is not powered by TAE that's a different frame work where they model different components that make a complete modeled synth engine that emulates the circuits and components of the original synth it's emulating and then runs that model in the TAE framework

The product manager goes on to say that

"Pigments’ Audio Engine is really quite different given that it’s not an emulation."

https://vi-control.net/community/thread ... me.149862/

Of course the Jup-8000v is not an emulation either, they didn't use TAE to model and emulate individual circuits and then use them to build a new TAE powered synth engine

Hope that clears things up

[Hyperbole]

But maybe this explanation from Arturia's product manager will shed light (emphasis mine):

Without going into too much detail, that’s pretty much how it works; our hardware instruments/effects emulations are emulated on a component level, but there will be different DSP techniques involved depending on the components and circuits themselves, and TAE covers all our different approaches and techniques to achieve the best results. The complete emulated circuit (for the whole synth/effect) is a unique Audio Engine that is then housed in a shared interface (for the browser, tutorials, FX rack, settings etc) but with its own dedicated GUI.

Analog Lab is updated with each new product release to include the complete Audio Engine for the new release, so that it’s able to play the presets and respond to mappings etc. When you switch through presets for different synth emulations in Analog Lab, you are literally loading completely different engines, but it’s all pretty seamless because it’s deeply integrated.

Pigments’ Audio Engine is really quite different given that it’s not an emulation. It builds on a lot of DSP and Software expertise we’ve developed over the years of course, but it’s its own thing altogether. So it can do a lot more than our emulations, but it’s also not designed to emulate a specific circuit (though we do have some specific filter models built-in etc.). The only thing it really shares with any of the VCollection is the shared interface I mentioned earlier for browsing etc.

Hope this clarifies things a bit!

Cedric (Product Manager @Arturia)

Not that this will convince conspiracy theorists.

Is this quote dated before or after the release of V Collection 11 and the Jup-8000 V? If before, this doesn't clarify anything. Analog Lab could still be loading a modified version of Pigments when loading Jup-8000 V presets.

If Arturia were smart, they would indeed develop the synth version of a "game engine." They would then be able to develop plugins at a much faster clip. I suspect they haven't done this already because they contract out to third-party developers to create most of their emulations. And while I imagine Arturia provides technical guidance to these contractors (e.g., recommended frameworks, etc.) and access to existing codebases, each of these emulations seems to have been developed as a one-off product. That's probably why Arturia has to go back and rebuild emulations from scratch (making them incompatible with previous versions) when they want to improve a given emulation. The developer who coded the emulation is probably long gone by that point. If my experience working with software engineers is any indication, no developer ever wants to modify a previous engineer's code. They always say it is easier to rebuild the product from the ground up. Maybe it is, perhaps it isn't. But that's ALWAYS how it goes.

Contrast this with a single synth engine (Pigments) that can be more easily repurposed for various emulations. It's like Steinberg releasing Retrologue and Padshop when those standalone plugins have clearly been developed using the HALion engine. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Steinberg releases a "value add" FM plugin to include in future versions of Cubase that is a simplified version of the FM Lab instrument in HALion 7.

So maybe Arturia is changing its approach with the Jup-8000 V. Even if Arturia is still developing one-off emulations, I would guess that 90% of the Jup-8000 V code has been repurposed, if not from Pigments, then from the company's shared codebases (FX algorithms, etc.).

But as someone suggested, this is a question better asked of the Arturia Product Manager.

[Caine123]

very interesting, and i suspect that there is not a GROUNDUP new full code for each of their vst, again i suspect, this would be heavily time consuming and also i think/suspect, only heavy synth guys check the emulation heavily, over 90% just buy and play. so if you want authentic sounding replicas i would never bet on Arturia. should be clear since many years now.

thats why i would only buy some stuff from them in a bf sale or something or if they release something unique (like Pigments in the past, great synth!) and some effects. I was tempted to get the collection v11 but i dont need a lofi instrument now, minibrute or jup 8000v i will wait for Adam'S emulation which hopefully authentically gives a clearer emulation + sysex import hopefully + supporting adam's hard work as a non-big company.

[Rastkovic]

Regarding faithful recreation....

I remember people were complaining about the "clicky" envelopes on the JP-80x0 in the past few decades. So, do you really want that? In my opinion, the sound of the plugin is okay, you have to test it yourself.

This is not a 100% authentic emulation and probably never will be. That's okay, it's Arturia as we know it.

[Cyforce]

I'm a bit surprised that so many people are so fixated on direct comparisons (loading JP8000 presets, effects, etc.)

It's actually a good thing that it's not an exact JP8000 clone, i.e., not a 1:1 clone... otherwise, there wouldn't be multi-arp, the typical effects section, etc.

[PAK]

Regarding faithful recreation....
I remember people were complaining about the "clicky" envelopes on the JP-80x0 in the past few decades. So, do you really want that?

Well, you kinda do when it’s part of the original. But many (most?) people hate clicky envelopes and definitely saw them as a flaw on VA synths. I remember the Novation KS series had to issue a firmware “fix” because of complaints it had clicky envelopes.

These days there’s (maybe) a more nuanced understanding that you might want the click sometimes, and having to move the attack a couple of milliseconds is not the end of the world. But, if they ever did implement it, they'd be well advised to have a clicky and non-clicky mode, simply because you’re guaranteed people will complain if they hear any click.