UVI Synth Anthology 5

[mxbf]

im very glad i went ahead and let this take up some disk space. seems like a MAJOR improvement from my last use of this line which was synth anthology 2. even just as a way of literally just learning about synth history and exploiring things i didnt know existed, which actually i think is basically the amazing thing about this. the new approach where everything works inside of the program is great

seems like sounds load way faster which is one of the few things about UVI stuff that can be irritating

it would be amazingly sick if every patch or sound you could click and read history of the synth and when it came out and some info about it. but googling is cool too. like Crumar Bit 99 for random example... never heard of it at all.

[Examigan]

it would be amazingly sick if every patch or sound you could click and read history of the synth and when it came out and some info about it. but googling is cool too. like Crumar Bit 99 for random example... never heard of it at all.

I don't have this one, but I do have String Machines 2 and it would be nice to have some info like that for each of the machines they sampled.

There is room for some brief info on the right-hand side of the display:

String Machines 2.jpg

[oobesan]

It makes no sense that you have to keep both SA4 and SA5. SA5 = SA4 + new samples + two new filters + improvements to its sequencer. It in no way should break your projects containing SA4. At the very least, they could have allowed by SA5 to add the new sample banks to the same file where your SA4 sample banks are, so that you didn't have to double up on hard drive space. It's lazy and it's BS.

[NoriSato]

It makes no sense that you have to keep both SA4 and SA5. SA5 = SA4 + new samples + two new filters + improvements to its sequencer. It in no way should break your projects containing SA4. At the very least, they could have allowed by SA5 to add the new sample banks to the same file where your SA4 sample banks are, so that you didn't have to double up on hard drive space. It's lazy and it's BS.

As I said earlyer, you should keep SA4 if you want to use sample in other oscirator in FALCON. If you don't have FALCON or don't edit sound, then it's OK. SA5 is completely different from SA4. It uses new "sample mapping" oscirator.

"sample mapping" is new oscirator. I play around SA5 these days. Here is my impressinons.

PROS:

- "sample mapping" include multi sample files in one oscirator. You have only one keygroup for multiple samples. It is very easy to handle. You need not copy entire layer, but only one keygroup.

- For SA4, if you want to edit one synth sound, you must select all keygroups from mapping editor and must use batch mode. Otherwise whole patch will be collapse. I often made this mistake and ended up having to redo the entire patch. SA5 has no such problem.

CONS:

- There is no adjustable parameter for "sample mapping". Unlike SA4, you can not change mapping, edit samples such as reverse, clip, etc.

- Because individual samples within a multi-sample are not visible, the samples cannot be reused for other oscirators such as granular or plack.

- Pitch and maybe velocity are controlled in the script, so when you copy Layer A into other patch, often sound shifted 1 or 2 octave. Must use transpose MIDI control in layer's event section.

- It is 1 keygroup in 1 layer structure. Why keygroup level modulator (amp env and filter env, etc) are located in layer level?

FALCON is a fantastic piece of software that seamlessly integrates samples with other synth functions, but at the moment, this sample mapping feels somewhat out of place.

I wish next FALCON version can handle "sample mapping" more excellent and more be integrated.

[oobesan]

wtf is an oscirator?

[NoriSato]

if you don't own FALCON, don't care. SA5 include all preset of SA4.
Use only SA5 as sound library in UVI workstation.

[NoriSato]

if you don't own FALCON, no need to worry about. SA5 include all preset of SA4.
Use only SA5 as sound library in UVI workstation.