KVR Audio

Hunter · Post by **Hunter** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 12:17 pm

luckystrike wrote:You heard his original sample then why don't you use it and show that the result is different in your system rather than being skeptical about others' testing method? If it's been wrong the sound itself would show the fact. Only then there will be able to doubt that the wrong method would have been taken in some of the test. It's more constructive and more polite.

He's already done it but won't declare his methods, if he would state what import methods and process was used it would answer everything, though it is tempting to do it anyway, anyway I don't think the original sample has been provided either apart from at the start of a mixed down mp3? I don't really have the time or inclination to show how it should be done anyway - like others I'm just pointing out the comparisons being made in this thread are invalid.

tony tony chopper · Post by **tony tony chopper** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 12:23 pm

like others I'm just pointing out the comparisons being made in this thread are invalid.

..just like the one on page 1 you mean.

A good rest would imply audio of various types anyway. Monophonic, polyphonic, vocals, drumloops, etc.

John [Humanoid Sound Sys] · Tue Sep 13, 2011 3:42 pm

Alchemy certainly does do proper morphing in both additive and spectral modes. In both modes it morphs the amplitudes and frequencies of the partials as well as the timing of the sound, so that if, for instance, one sample has a long attack and another has a short one then, if the morph position is in the middle, the attack portions of the samples will be stretched so that the resulting sound has an attack length half way between them. The samples are time-aligned using warp markers and Alchemy automatically creates warp markers at the start of the sample, the peak of the attack, the end of the attack, the beginning of the release and the end of the sample. However you can move these markers however you like and create new ones in order to do manual time-alignment.

Alchemy's additive analysis/synthesis is designed for resynthesising harmonic sounds i.e. single notes rather than chords. For chords, the spectral engine will produce better results.

Krakatau · Post by **Krakatau** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 3:59 pm

John [Humanoid Sound Sys] wrote:Alchemy's additive analysis/synthesis is designed for resynthesising harmonic sounds i.e. single notes rather than chords. For chords, the spectral engine will produce better results.

interesting...

Nokenoku · Post by **Nokenoku** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 4:05 pm

Lotuzia wrote:... The algorythm doesnt understand what drums are, and how they are played, it just makes an anlysis of a "rendered audio material", and tries to stretch it, that's a BIG difference !

Time-stretching is not the topic here.

Thx for the info John.

Krakatau · Post by **Krakatau** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 4:20 pm

Nokenoku wrote:
Lotuzia wrote:... The algorythm doesnt understand what drums are, and how they are played, it just makes an anlysis of a "rendered audio material", and tries to stretch it, that's a BIG difference !
Time-stretching is not the topic here.

Thx for the info John.

Not in itself right, but insn't it a very similar feature offered by and awaited from additive resynthesis anyway ?

let me disagree a little bit (just a little bit, ...ingenuously !)

stikygum · Post by **stikygum** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 6:55 pm

There is a an aweful lot of Alchemy/Harmor talk here. What about Vertigo, is it just not up to par as these other two? Not as immediate as Harmor or is the quality not there? (I'm at work or I would listen to these audio examples)

Donner · Post by **Donner** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 7:26 pm

stikygum wrote:There is a an aweful lot of Alchemy/Harmor talk here. What about Vertigo, is it just not up to par as these other two? Not as immediate as Harmor or is the quality not there? (I'm at work or I would listen to these audio examples)

I own Vertigo and has used it quite a bit. To my ears Vertigo sounds different compared to Harmor - they both sound great, but Harmor is better at preserving details when it comes to rhytmical or orchestral recordings (Harmor is more correct, you could say). Some of the sounds I've resynthesized sounds better in Vertigo, because it makes something to the sound that gives it added value.

It is great that they are different, else it would be utterly boring...

I do not own Alchemy, but I've demoed it and I simply don't like the way it sounds. A lot of people enjoy using it, so that is just fine.

And don't forget Morphine, that is also one mean machine, totally different from these three.

stikygum · Post by **stikygum** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 9:27 pm

Morphine costs $60 more (later will be $10 once Harmor's promotion time is done). It seems like Harmor sounds much better than Morphine. Not sure why they offer 3 different additive type synths: Harmless, Harmor and Morphine, instead of just focusing and updating one.

Vertigo seems like a good deal and less expensive. (Had my eye on Razor too, the leads in that thing sound quite good)

Krakatau · Post by **Krakatau** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 9:32 pm

well...indeed Razor is an additive based synthesizer but does offer resynthesis or silly me, did i missed something ?

stikygum · Post by **stikygum** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 10:05 pm

Haha, yeah I should probably ask direct questions instead of make subtle implications as to what I'm considering. I know razor is quite different and not like these others listed here. I just really liked the K5000 and figure I should look more into anything additive.

Nokenoku · Post by **Nokenoku** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 10:29 pm

stikygum wrote:There is a an aweful lot of Alchemy/Harmor talk here. What about Vertigo, is it just not up to par as these other two? Not as immediate as Harmor or is the quality not there? (I'm at work or I would listen to these audio examples)

I don't know ... I never heard of Vertigo before, and I guess it's the same for other people.

tony tony chopper · Post by **tony tony chopper** » Wed Sep 14, 2011 6:28 am

Not sure why they offer 3 different additive type synths: Harmless, Harmor and Morphine, instead of just focusing and updating one.

Harmless: Harmor IS the Harmless "update" (unless you really believe that a VSTi like Harmless can be "updated" as a Harmless 1.1 that would be Harmor, without breaking backwards compatibility).
Harmless was to see if an additive engine could be used for convincing subtractive resynthesis. And it still makes sense, to those who find Harmor too complex. Harmor = Harmless + Sytrus envelopes + image synthesis/resynthesis (+2 parts & features)

Morphine: totally unrelated, it's a plugin by Maxx Claster

Hunter · Post by **Hunter** » Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:56 am

stikygum wrote:I just really liked the K5000 and figure I should look more into anything additive.

Well you can program partial by partial, breakpoint by breakpoint and get some pretty K5000'y results in Alchemy, but to be honest you'll need the patience of a saint and a lot of time to get results. I made some pure additive patches for cameleon years ago but I don't think its something I would take on in Alchemy. There is the spreadsheet function where you can program the partials via a spreadsheet, but I've not tried it since it was fixed, I had got the basics of it but the way tunings are dealt with has changed since then. Being able to import K5000 presets would be awesome.

I don't think you could beat Harmor or Razor for control over pure additive synthesis (rather than resynthesis of existing sounds) at the moment.

Ben H · Post by **Ben H** » Wed Sep 14, 2011 10:42 am

K5000 import for Alchemy would be very cool.

It will probably never happen though, given the amount of coding time it would take for a one-time operation.

Vertigo vs Harmor vs Alchemy