Retrologue by Steinberg

[IvyBirds]

I just derived my statement from the fact, that Diva uses more modern and CPU-consuming technique of modeling, than Retrologue. If that doesn't lead to sound DIVA better in your ears, go with Retrologue.

Why do you think so? Diva is a year older than Retrologue 1, 2011 vs 2012.

Assuming we are allowed to talk about other Synths without certain people's panties getting all into a bunch

When DIVA came out in late 2011 the goal for U-he was to be the first plugin synthesizer that was indistinguishable from real analog hardware, regardless of the CPU cost.

With Retrologue that came out the following year, Steinberg wanted a highly efficient VA plugin primarily for Cubase users that they could use multiple instances of in a project. Once that would give vintage synth vibes but be a versatile "bread-and-butter" virtual analog synth

[zerocrossing]

I just derived my statement from the fact, that Diva uses more modern and CPU-consuming technique of modeling, than Retrologue. If that doesn't lead to sound DIVA better in your ears, go with Retrologue.

Why do you think so? Diva is a year older than Retrologue 1, 2011 vs 2012.

There isn't really a linear progression of instrument development. One developer can make advancements, while other companies race to keep up... or don't bother at all. Look at Admiral Quality's Poly-Ana. When it was released, it was considered one of the better sounding analog emulations, but while other companies advanced, they did not. You can still get good basic analog sounds out of it, but when you push the more difficult types of sounds, it fails, while more modern synths do a lot better. You can hear this with Diva vs. Repro.

Retrolouge is an OK synthesizer. My issues with it are that it neither sounds "retro" nor "analogue." No that those qualities are necessary to make cool sounds, or good music, but it's like ordering a martini and getting a gin and tonic. I bought v1 a long time ago, but I'd never buy it now. Frankly, I hate Steinberg. I hate how they sell their instruments, I hate their installation methods. I hate Cubase. So many people recommended it, I bought it for my employer, for me to use on a game project. The project got cancelled and the entire team was laid off, but I did spend time gearing up to switch from Bitwig to Cubase, and I hated every moment of it. The workflow seemed archaic and unintuitive, and I've been using DAWs since Opcode's Studio Vision Pro.

Of course, this is just one man's opinion, and if you dig Steinberg and its instruments, have at it. It's just not for me, and even if there was some benefit from switching, I didn't see it.

[Alexander_D]

I just derived my statement from the fact, that Diva uses more modern and CPU-consuming technique of modeling, than Retrologue. If that doesn't lead to sound DIVA better in your ears, go with Retrologue.

Why do you think so? Diva is a year older than Retrologue 1, 2011 vs 2012.

There isn't really a linear progression of instrument development. One developer can make advancements, while other companies race to keep up... or don't bother at all. Look at Admiral Quality's Poly-Ana. When it was released, it was considered one of the better sounding analog emulations, but while other companies advanced, they did not. You can still get good basic analog sounds out of it, but when you push the more difficult types of sounds, it fails, while more modern synths do a lot better. You can hear this with Diva vs. Repro.

Retrolouge is an OK synthesizer. My issues with it are that it neither sounds "retro" nor "analogue." No that those qualities are necessary to make cool sounds, or good music, but it's like ordering a martini and getting a gin and tonic. I bought v1 a long time ago, but I'd never buy it now. Frankly, I hate Steinberg. I hate how they sell their instruments, I hate their installation methods. I hate Cubase. So many people recommended it, I bought it for my employer, for me to use on a game project. The project got cancelled and the entire team was laid off, but I did spend time gearing up to switch from Bitwig to Cubase, and I hated every moment of it. The workflow seemed archaic and unintuitive, and I've been using DAWs since Opcode's Studio Vision Pro.

Of course, this is just one man's opinion, and if you dig Steinberg and its instruments, have at it. It's just not for me, and even if there was some benefit from switching, I didn't see it.

I think that all choose DAWs by their needs. So I am a film composer and Cubase one of the best Daw for this thing. It's impossible to score for the picture in Bitwig for example...

[cobaia]

I just derived my statement from the fact, that Diva uses more modern and CPU-consuming technique of modeling, than Retrologue. If that doesn't lead to sound DIVA better in your ears, go with Retrologue.

Why do you think so? Diva is a year older than Retrologue 1, 2011 vs 2012.

Assuming we are allowed to talk about other Synths without certain people's panties getting all into a bunch

When DIVA came out in late 2011 the goal for U-he was to be the first plugin synthesizer that was indistinguishable from real analog hardware, regardless of the CPU cost.

With Retrologue that came out the following year, Steinberg wanted a highly efficient VA plugin primarily for Cubase users that they could use multiple instances of in a project. Once that would give vintage synth vibes but be a versatile "bread-and-butter" virtual analog synth

I don't know what Steinberg thought when they made R2.

I don't get your distinction between Diva and R2. They are BOTH VA synths. After all, we are not talking about hardware (where the distinction made sense), but software. They both are 100% software synths, no analog components, both trying to emulate the sound of analog/subtractive hardware by trying to emulate oscillators, filters, envelopes and all those components. It's not rocket science...

[cobaia]

I just derived my statement from the fact, that Diva uses more modern and CPU-consuming technique of modeling, than Retrologue. If that doesn't lead to sound DIVA better in your ears, go with Retrologue.

Why do you think so? Diva is a year older than Retrologue 1, 2011 vs 2012.

There isn't really a linear progression of instrument development. One developer can make advancements, while other companies race to keep up... or don't bother at all. Look at Admiral Quality's Poly-Ana. When it was released, it was considered one of the better sounding analog emulations, but while other companies advanced, they did not. You can still get good basic analog sounds out of it, but when you push the more difficult types of sounds, it fails, while more modern synths do a lot better. You can hear this with Diva vs. Repro.

Retrolouge is an OK synthesizer. My issues with it are that it neither sounds "retro" nor "analogue." No that those qualities are necessary to make cool sounds, or good music, but it's like ordering a martini and getting a gin and tonic. I bought v1 a long time ago, but I'd never buy it now. Frankly, I hate Steinberg. I hate how they sell their instruments, I hate their installation methods. I hate Cubase. So many people recommended it, I bought it for my employer, for me to use on a game project. The project got cancelled and the entire team was laid off, but I did spend time gearing up to switch from Bitwig to Cubase, and I hated every moment of it. The workflow seemed archaic and unintuitive, and I've been using DAWs since Opcode's Studio Vision Pro.

Of course, this is just one man's opinion, and if you dig Steinberg and its instruments, have at it. It's just not for me, and even if there was some benefit from switching, I didn't see it.

A lot of people seem to have Diva, Repro etc. But oddly nobody seems capable of telling me a few specific patches in them, which they think are authentically analog sounding Diva comes with hundreds of patches, just name 3 that epitomize analog sound.

I can't say anything about other Steinberg stuff, never used Cubase. But it seems to be a clumsy company.

[IvyBirds]

I just derived my statement from the fact, that Diva uses more modern and CPU-consuming technique of modeling, than Retrologue. If that doesn't lead to sound DIVA better in your ears, go with Retrologue.

Why do you think so? Diva is a year older than Retrologue 1, 2011 vs 2012.

Assuming we are allowed to talk about other Synths without certain people's panties getting all into a bunch

When DIVA came out in late 2011 the goal for U-he was to be the first plugin synthesizer that was indistinguishable from real analog hardware, regardless of the CPU cost.

With Retrologue that came out the following year, Steinberg wanted a highly efficient VA plugin primarily for Cubase users that they could use multiple instances of in a project. Once that would give vintage synth vibes but be a versatile "bread-and-butter" virtual analog synth

I don't know what Steinberg thought when they made R2.

I don't get your distinction between Diva and R2. They are BOTH VA synths. After all, we are not talking about hardware (where the distinction made sense), but software. They both are 100% software synths, no analog components, both trying to emulate the sound of analog/subtractive hardware by trying to emulate oscillators, filters, envelopes and all those components. It's not rocket science...

It's simple DIVA was made to specifically emulate the sound of analog hardware as closely as possible by using analog modeling despite the CPU hit. It's developer is right here in KVR and has talked about exactly that many times

Retrologue didn't, Retrologue was designed to be CPU efficient

Don't believe me read the reviews from when they were released. The #1 bullet point was CPU efficiency. No need to try to read the minds of anyone at Steinberg on that to know what they were thinking

When Retrologue came out CPUs and RAM were more limited than what we have today, so having a good sounding VA that was also CPU efficient was a good selling point

[BBFG#]

Just as a reminder, if you think anything trying to sound analog doesn't sound analogue, then you're wrong.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogue_(literature)
As opposed to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_(disambiguation
Which begs the question of which brand of hardware analog synthesizer is more analog than the others? Moog, Oberheim, Sequential or another?
As if analog has an absolute...
I find Retrologue a good stable solid plugin in sound and character. Can easily say the same for Diva. But I use Diva in probably a twenty to one ratio to Retrologue. I think it's a subjective feeling I get when I play it. And if neither do it for you, find something that does.