Is the Minimonsta as good as Access Virus?
-
original flipper original flipper https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=8999
- KVRAF
- 2544 posts since 14 Sep, 2003 from Essex
Sorry!!!
-
- Banned
- 18651 posts since 2 Oct, 2001 from England
Actually, i dont care, but the comparison is still ridiculous.ct43 wrote:I really dont think you guys understand my point here...Kriminal wrote:I think its ridiculousmunchkin wrote:I think it's unfair to compare it with a Virus.
-
- KVRAF
- 25032 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia
so why are you asking then? - You aren't even interested enough in the Virus to go to a shop and test it but nonetheless you start a thread where you try to compare it with a synth which is totally unrelated!ct43 wrote:ive never actually used a Virus.. so I dont know how they compare really (just heard the low res demos on the Access site)
How much more stoopid does it get?
-
- KVRAF
- 2336 posts since 13 Oct, 2002 from Terra Firma
If I had the time and the expertise to do it properly then I would but I think there must be others here who own the virus and have experience in making samplebanks who could do the virus justice.Kriminal wrote:Could you physically make decent multi samples (mutli notes, not velocities) and would you be prepared to, so i could make a few banks for Orions Sampler. ?munchkin wrote:The Virus is a great synth. I have the hardware Virus C and a Poco Virus B. It just has soooo many presets that every analog synth sound imaginable is catered for by the presets alone. You won't be disappointed by it, believe me. Now that the TI is available there is nothing in hardware that can touch it as far as analog emu's are concerned. The sound of the Virus is awesome. Demo it at your local music store to get a real feel for it. Mp3's can never do it justice.ct43 wrote:yeah I am being serious...
I know fully well that they are different synths, IMO the Virus has more features & sound possabilities than the Mini, but Im talking from a general tone point of view here.. to me the mini is very smooth sounding & is the closest to analogue ive heard so far (& yeah the Ultra Analogue is really good as well)... ive never actually used a Virus.. so I dont know how they compare really (just heard the low res demos on the Access site)
just thought the mini was a big step up in the quest for analogue sounding software synths thats all...
Minimonsta is a lovely synth. Well worth the money. I think it's unfair to compare it with a Virus. The Virus can do so much more soundwise. The quality of sound is good in both synths. Two wonderful synths IMO.
There are hundreds of banks of presets available for the Virus so choosing which ones to turn into multisamples is going to be a task in itself.
Anyone able to multisample the virus?
-
- KVRist
- 254 posts since 4 Nov, 2004
What is the reason to make the quality of a VSTi dependable from the comparison result with a hardware instrument? In my opinion is the quality only to justify by the sounds and capabilities of the instrument itself. Nearly every VSTi is hi-classed nowadays. And so is the Minimonsta. Ok, it has the character of the Minimoog, but it sounds not the same. That is alright. Minimonsta has a fantastic sound, awesome filters that I seldom heard with this quality even in hardware instruments. I love the GUI. The sound capabilities are not limited so far I checked it before the demo had expired. I love the Melohman-conception, the "switching-octave" and the fact to manipulate every parameter. Of course you can make virus-like sounds with it, but it has its own character. I don't know even one musician that says:"If I had a VSTi that sounds exactly like the Access Virus, I could make a good song!"
The source of light is darkness
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111301 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
ct43 wrote:I really dont think you guys understand my point here...Kriminal wrote:I think its ridiculousmunchkin wrote:I think it's unfair to compare it with a Virus.
i have a virus,i dont want it,if you can come round you can pick it up for free.
b btw.
-
- KVRian
- 1243 posts since 24 Oct, 2003 from Maine
I own the Virus B. They have a similar filter quality. I'm speaking simply in terms of "resolution" here, ie no stepping, perfect resonance, and fast, bouncy dynamics; the virus' filter doesn't distort in the way that the mini's does (I haven't tried the C's moog filter though). The Oscillators have a very different sound. The mini's are "cleaner," in that they alias less, and "fatter," in that they saturate like analog oscillators, transparent but sonically enhancing somehow.
Of course the big thing here is that the Virus has loads more sonic possibilities.
I know it's hard to take a comparison like this seriously because of the reputation Virus vs the world threads tend to get on KvR, but I think it's a good comparison to make, mainly for this reason:
IMO, the filter is what makes the virus. It's what gives it that extra bounce and transparency. The monsta does a similar kind of thing, unlike any plugin I've heard thus far. There are some sounds that the Virus could only seem to do satisfactorilly before the monsta.
Anyway my verdict:
It's as good or better for the sounds that both synths can do, IMO.
It's not as good because it doesn't have the features of the virus (why no poly unison!?!? =().
Of course the big thing here is that the Virus has loads more sonic possibilities.
I know it's hard to take a comparison like this seriously because of the reputation Virus vs the world threads tend to get on KvR, but I think it's a good comparison to make, mainly for this reason:
IMO, the filter is what makes the virus. It's what gives it that extra bounce and transparency. The monsta does a similar kind of thing, unlike any plugin I've heard thus far. There are some sounds that the Virus could only seem to do satisfactorilly before the monsta.
Anyway my verdict:
It's as good or better for the sounds that both synths can do, IMO.
It's not as good because it doesn't have the features of the virus (why no poly unison!?!? =().
-
- KVRAF
- 2336 posts since 13 Oct, 2002 from Terra Firma
vurt wrote:ct43 wrote:I really dont think you guys understand my point here...Kriminal wrote:I think its ridiculousmunchkin wrote:I think it's unfair to compare it with a Virus.
i have a virus,i dont want it,if you can come round you can pick it up for free.
b btw.
-
- KVRist
- 472 posts since 13 Oct, 2002 from Paris
I don't think the question is that pointless. After all, a lot of ppl buy those synths to do some famous, specific sounds, and in that perspective M:M and Virus can end up being used for the same purpose. I don't think you can end up by saying that one is better thant the other, but you can define better the character of each and what it means to use one rather than another.
Apart from the sound (I really don't know Virus enough to speak on this), the main differences is the routing (more "modern" for the Virus, although the huge added modulation system of the M:M allow some sounds at least as complex) and the Melohman (or lack of Melohman) functions. On the long range, I thing it's the thing that makes the biggest gap, not only with Virus, but with any non Melohman synth.
Apart from the sound (I really don't know Virus enough to speak on this), the main differences is the routing (more "modern" for the Virus, although the huge added modulation system of the M:M allow some sounds at least as complex) and the Melohman (or lack of Melohman) functions. On the long range, I thing it's the thing that makes the biggest gap, not only with Virus, but with any non Melohman synth.
-
- KVRAF
- 37444 posts since 14 Sep, 2002 from In teh net
Wasn't the filter on the Virus modelled on the Moog filter anyway originally?
-
- KVRAF
- 2336 posts since 13 Oct, 2002 from Terra Firma
But you might as well compare MM to z3ta+ or Tassman then. I just don't believe that comparing MM with a Virus C or TI is any use whatsoever. What are you trying to achieve except hype up MM in a really embarrassing way.
The MM can make the sounds of the 303/SH01 but is there any point in comparing them?
This just seems like another promotional thread for MM and I'm getting a sick of seeing these threads really. Yes, MM's a good synth blah blah blah but get a f**king grip and stop all the marketing hype please! I don't think I've ever seen any synth as hyped up pre-release as the MM. It's a f**king embarrassment.
The MM can make the sounds of the 303/SH01 but is there any point in comparing them?
This just seems like another promotional thread for MM and I'm getting a sick of seeing these threads really. Yes, MM's a good synth blah blah blah but get a f**king grip and stop all the marketing hype please! I don't think I've ever seen any synth as hyped up pre-release as the MM. It's a f**king embarrassment.
-
- KVRAF
- 25032 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia
agreed!
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111301 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
munchkin wrote:vurt wrote:ct43 wrote:I really dont think you guys understand my point here...Kriminal wrote:I think its ridiculousmunchkin wrote:I think it's unfair to compare it with a Virus.
i have a virus,i dont want it,if you can come round you can pick it up for free.
b btw.
dont worry mate,ive seen the doctor,as long as i take the medicine it should clear up
-
- KVRAF
- 1617 posts since 2 Dec, 2003
IMO there's good reason for this (even if this thread was a bit ridiculous). when's the last time two big companies released an emu for the exact same thing? people just want to know the pros and cons for each of them...munchkin wrote: This just seems like another promotional thread for MM and I'm getting a sick of seeing these threads really. Yes, MM's a good synth blah blah blah but get a f**king grip and stop all the marketing hype please! I don't think I've ever seen any synth as hyped up pre-release as the MM. It's a f**king embarrassment.
