I had a virus for awhile. The sound quality is very good. I think that the variety of sounds that can be made with the Waldorf Q is much greater. I also think that the variety of sounds that can be made with several soft synths is greater.pustekuchen wrote:Well.Jonny X wrote:I watched a video that came with FM last month, the guy (Wizard of Deekline&Wizard) showed them round the studio, got to the Virus, and was like
"yeah thats the virus, gotta have one of them, they make nice sounds but they don't fit in tracks without turning of most of the stuff" (same for the Novation SuperNova II) He strangly like the Juno 106 (Which I like too)
Point?
A synth can sound amazing, but does it matter? The best are those that fit with other gear and need minimal tweaking to do so...
That guy did probably not understand, that the VIRUS is not a "preset box" like most other synthesizers. I guess, he is one of those mens, who expect all the time "well siting presets" on demand ...
The Virus is actually a box, where you have allot of knobs to do even that: EDIT the sounds (and also save it for next time).
And: It's natural, that the *factory* presets are made to demonstrate the solistic features of the Virus. They (the "showcase-like" presets) are probably not intended to "sit well" inside any mix.
Althought there are specialized soundsets out.
So what is actually your point?
The Virus does sound very good inside a mix for some reasons (mayby not on demand for any music style...). But and because of it's sonic qualities, sound architecture and entire variousity, it exceeds the limit of nearly all the currently available VSTi VAs. (That of couse is merely discoverable, if you have one...
... and ssuming you are able to tweak the knobs right and are not such a dumb ass ...
.
Emulations - Architecture vs. real emulation
-
- KVRian
- 1032 posts since 2 Aug, 2004
-
- Banned
- 705 posts since 29 Jan, 2004
I still own (and excessively use) a Virus and most "state of the art" softsynths.
A Virus is used most in nearly evey production I made.
With sonic variousity I meant one single software instrument. Not an entire brunch compared to the Virus. And only VAs, of course...
Tell me one VA VSTi, which compars to it. I am really strained to learn something here now ...
.
A Virus is used most in nearly evey production I made.
With sonic variousity I meant one single software instrument. Not an entire brunch compared to the Virus. And only VAs, of course...
Tell me one VA VSTi, which compars to it. I am really strained to learn something here now ...
.
-
- KVRian
- 1032 posts since 2 Aug, 2004
Sorry - I didn't quite understand your question. But, I guess, I have somewhat of a hidden agenda - which I will now profess.pustekuchen wrote:I still own (and excessively use) a Virus and most "state of the art" softsynths.
A Virus is used most in nearly evey production I made.
With sonic variousity I meant one single software instrument. Not an entire brunch compared to the Virus. And only VAs, of course...
Tell me one VA VSTi, which compars to it. I am really strained to learn something here now ...
.
I really do agree - the Virus sounds great. I owned an original Virus, and a Virus C. I have also owned a variety of Waldorf equipment, which unfortunately I had to sell during a long period of unemployment.
I found the Virus to have a very seductive sound. No complaints there. But I always found the interface, and the mod routings of the Waldorf stuff to make it a far more pleasurable instrument to actually USE. Obviously that's my subjective opinion, since many people like working on the Virus.
But, as far as a range of sounds? Tera, I think has a wider potential variety. Vaz modular, of course. Other synths are more specialized, but I think provide more variety, though perhaps not in the more 'traditional' synth timbres. The Neuron VS. Off the top of my head now...Zebra - I can't wait for 2.0, now that I'm using a pc. As a Traditional VA, certainly, the Virus is at near the top. But is it really so much better than z3ta+. I dunno, really.
IN any case - I still debate in my head whether to purchase on of the new Virii (should that be 'iii'?). There is definitely something very appealing about it. But some of the appeal of hardware is that you can get so many voices, and not detract from your pc performance. If I had a 100 ghz machine, would I want a Virus? I really don't know. I can't tell any more. Shoot me.
-
- Banned
- 705 posts since 29 Jan, 2004
Yes. Definately. There is really no question. Featureset-wise and sound quality-wise. And architectural completely different.droolmaster0 wrote:... But is it really so much better than z3ta+. I dunno, really. ...
.
-
- KVRian
- 1032 posts since 2 Aug, 2004
hmmm - I don't have the Virus anymore. But I have a pretty good sound card (rme fireface), and Z3ta+ sounds damn good, plus seems to give me a very wide variety of sounds. Yes - very different. The Virus is more of a pure VA - but that's one reason why it seems (in my recollection) more limited. If you move away from the analog emulation requirement, does the Virus really sound better? Or just different? (I do find myself gradually succumbing to the Virus hype again - but I don't want to buy the damn thing a third time and then sell it again. I must fight it)pustekuchen wrote:Yes. Definately. There is really no question. Featureset-wise and sound quality-wise. And architectural completely different.droolmaster0 wrote:... But is it really so much better than z3ta+. I dunno, really. ...
.
-
- KVRist
- 38 posts since 13 Feb, 2005 from Finland
Is it allowed to give links here? Well I takekybernaut wrote:I have to second this. It's not per se a good virtual analog. It may have some apealing sounds for a certain target group, but thats about it.droolmaster0 wrote:jp8000 sucked.
my chances becouse I think this link fits here
nicely.
http://www.sequencer.de/mp/roland/jp8000demo.mp3
I think that sounds simply gorgeous compared
to 95% of softsynths. Its true, probably
it doesnst exactly sound ANALOG, but boy,
it does sounds good. Its subjective okay,
but sometimes I just feel that some people just doesnt have ears, or they just have great error
of judgements about what sounds inferior
and what not..sorry..hehe, but I
REALLY do wonder again.
There is few synths of softside I feel what are
a bit hyped..most of all
Z3ta+ , its really fine for the bang
of the buck, it has good features, in paper
it is superb, but I think it just sounds
too weak, only good sounds I liked its demo
were it,
were some solid nice basses, but overally
it sounds too toyish, not like real player,
sound character is just not good enough.
Vanguard has a bit same problem, its sound character
does miss certain warmnesss/fullnes, but I like it more due it has some very own character, Vanguard though is very nice when used with some other stuff,
like Atmosphere etc, which has more fullness, deepness. (yea atmosphere doenst fit mix well..
I dont care, I know how to make it fit there
Then Tera..well it has surely good features,
good alarounder, not too bad sound, it has character
depending the definition of character..but for me
it sounds very basic..very basic synth sound.
Not too bad, but nothing superb going on, expect
many possibilities, it would be superb though,
with better overall sound. BUt I would be happy
to buy it even now, if it would be just a bit
cheaper.
Just subjective opinions perhaps..but I like
my opinions so far enough to keep them.
But I really hope all more and more synthpeople
go for software becouse I am happy to buy
their harware cheap then. javascript:emoticon(':hihi:')
Btw..I wish they release soon Kurzweil k3000 in Vst
with price around 500 euros or less.
Just a wish..
javascript:emoticon(':roll:')
javascript:emoticon(':love:')
-
- KVRian
- 1032 posts since 2 Aug, 2004
I had the chance to play on a jp8000 extensively when I worked in a music store years ago. It came out at about the same time as the Waldorf Microwave 2. I thought that the jp8000 just lacked a center to the sound. It sounded so digital, in the bad sense. The mw2 sounded obviously superior to all who heard them both side by side at the time.Zamson wrote:Is it allowed to give links here? Well I takekybernaut wrote:I have to second this. It's not per se a good virtual analog. It may have some apealing sounds for a certain target group, but thats about it.droolmaster0 wrote:jp8000 sucked.
my chances becouse I think this link fits here
nicely.
http://www.sequencer.de/mp/roland/jp8000demo.mp3
I think that sounds simply gorgeous compared
to 95% of softsynths. Its true, probably
it doesnst exactly sound ANALOG, but boy,
it does sounds good. Its subjective okay,
but sometimes I just feel that some people just doesnt have ears, or they just have great error
of judgements about what sounds inferior
and what not..sorry..hehe, but I
REALLY do wonder again.
There is few synths of softside I feel what are
a bit hyped..most of all
Z3ta+ , its really fine for the bang
of the buck, it has good features, in paper
it is superb, but I think it just sounds
too weak, only good sounds I liked its demo
were it,
were some solid nice basses, but overally
it sounds too toyish, not like real player,
sound character is just not good enough.
Vanguard has a bit same problem, its sound character
does miss certain warmnesss/fullnes, but I like it more due it has some very own character, Vanguard though is very nice when used with some other stuff,
like Atmosphere etc, which has more fullness, deepness. (yea atmosphere doenst fit mix well..
I dont care, I know how to make it fit there
Then Tera..well it has surely good features,
good alarounder, not too bad sound, it has character
depending the definition of character..but for me
it sounds very basic..very basic synth sound.
Not too bad, but nothing superb going on, expect
many possibilities, it would be superb though,
with better overall sound. BUt I would be happy
to buy it even now, if it would be just a bit
cheaper.
Just subjective opinions perhaps..but I like
my opinions so far enough to keep them.
But I really hope all more and more synthpeople
go for software becouse I am happy to buy
their harware cheap then. javascript:emoticon(':hihi:')
Btw..I wish they release soon Kurzweil k3000 in Vst
with price around 500 euros or less.
Just a wish..
javascript:emoticon(':roll:')
javascript:emoticon(':love:')
z3ta+ a toy? ok - you're entitled to that opinion. But this is why it's so subjective. the jp8000 was software from about 7-8 years ago, and z3ta+ is much more recent software. Off a nice soundcard it sure sounds nice. For that matter, so does its predecessor Pentagon.
It really comes down to what YOU like. But what I think is silly is anyone who claims that somehow digital hardware, especially OLD digital hardware somehow sounds better. You just LIKE that particular synth. That's all there is to it. And you're entitled. But I thought that the jp8000 truly sucked. I hated the damn thing because I thought that the sound just had no substance.
-
- Banned
- 705 posts since 29 Jan, 2004
Zamson wrote:
jp8000 ...
Well after listening to that, I find it really sounds a little bit digital.
How did you redord it?
OK, ok, it is now several years old, but ...
I have a Yamaha AN1x at home, which came out approximately the same time. It sounds in my opinion much better and more "analog".
I'll try to find the demosongs an post the examples ...
.
-
- KVRist
- 193 posts since 18 Jul, 2001
First of all, this is a very well produced demo. I extensively played a JP8000 myself and benchmarked it against all the other VAs. The JP is rather weak and flimsy compared to them. Also, you should compare VAs always without FX.Zamson wrote:
jp8000 ...
The Microwave 2/XT is indeed very impressive at analog sounds, although it is capable of much more. The filters where top notch when it came out in 1997 and where among the most faithful recreations of analog filters.
I also owned the AN1x and can confirm that it is a very impressive virtual analog (much underrated by the way). It has got very fast envelopes and great filters. Only the basic waveforms are a bit weak.
Today, the top notch VAs come from Creamware, Alesis, GMedia, and Korg, IMO.
[/b]
-
- KVRist
- 38 posts since 13 Feb, 2005 from Finland
[/quote]
I had the chance to play on a jp8000 extensively when I worked in a music store years ago. It came out at about the same time as the Waldorf Microwave 2. I thought that the jp8000 just lacked a center to the sound. It sounded so digital, in the bad sense. The mw2 sounded obviously superior to all who heard them both side by side at the time.[/quote]
I see, well I dont own it either, but playid in
shop and at friends, also found many mp3 demos
from net of it, as the one did give link for.
Its fascinating how different ears catch different
things in sound isnt it? I think its digital but
good way, and lack of center? Hmm I havent think
about that earlier...
[/quote]
z3ta+ a toy? ok - you're entitled to that opinion. But this is why it's so subjective. the jp8000 was software from about 7-8 years ago, and z3ta+ is much more recent software. Off a nice soundcard it sure sounds nice. For that matter, so does its predecessor Pentagon.[/quote]
Jp8000 is old yes..so ? It sounds as good stillas it
did when it was released. You must agree that
something newer is not better just becouse
its newer? Well, I were about to buy Z3ta+,
I dont think its THAT toyish, but just a bit,
something in its sound bugs me, I just think
it kind of too hollow..or something.
I think it sounds like "8 bit resampled to 16",
just an analogy.
[/quote]
It really comes down to what YOU like. But what I think is silly is anyone who claims that somehow digital hardware, especially OLD digital hardware somehow sounds better. You just LIKE that particular synth. That's all there is to it. And you're entitled. But I thought that the jp8000 truly sucked. I hated the damn thing because I thought that the sound just had no substance.[/quote]
I think its not silly to say somethign sounds better
if I think it does..yes subjective..But age
doesnt make it sound bad..and good sound algorhimt
made 1995 is still good, and bad one made 2005 is still bad.. Techology around 1995 were already good enough to make such good synths, dsp chips were powerfull enough, and they had good enoguh AD/DA converters..
Do you think that developing good sound algoritms
were harder at those times? ITs same coding still today just possibly different platform.
And do you think
some young guy at 2005 with newest amd64 can somehow
know so much more about digital sound coding
than some korg's / roland' veteran engineer with
15 yers of experience?
New fast processor doenst make sound good,
good sound algoritms does it. And if
harware was good enough for some good sound algorhitm
, thats enough.. sure there is more possibilites
today..but are they even near fully used yet?
Certainly not.
YEs guess I am just liking that particular synth
(jp8000)..And seem you like some other synths..fine.
Guess we have right for that.
I had the chance to play on a jp8000 extensively when I worked in a music store years ago. It came out at about the same time as the Waldorf Microwave 2. I thought that the jp8000 just lacked a center to the sound. It sounded so digital, in the bad sense. The mw2 sounded obviously superior to all who heard them both side by side at the time.[/quote]
I see, well I dont own it either, but playid in
shop and at friends, also found many mp3 demos
from net of it, as the one did give link for.
Its fascinating how different ears catch different
things in sound isnt it? I think its digital but
good way, and lack of center? Hmm I havent think
about that earlier...
[/quote]
z3ta+ a toy? ok - you're entitled to that opinion. But this is why it's so subjective. the jp8000 was software from about 7-8 years ago, and z3ta+ is much more recent software. Off a nice soundcard it sure sounds nice. For that matter, so does its predecessor Pentagon.[/quote]
Jp8000 is old yes..so ? It sounds as good stillas it
did when it was released. You must agree that
something newer is not better just becouse
its newer? Well, I were about to buy Z3ta+,
I dont think its THAT toyish, but just a bit,
something in its sound bugs me, I just think
it kind of too hollow..or something.
I think it sounds like "8 bit resampled to 16",
just an analogy.
[/quote]
It really comes down to what YOU like. But what I think is silly is anyone who claims that somehow digital hardware, especially OLD digital hardware somehow sounds better. You just LIKE that particular synth. That's all there is to it. And you're entitled. But I thought that the jp8000 truly sucked. I hated the damn thing because I thought that the sound just had no substance.[/quote]
I think its not silly to say somethign sounds better
if I think it does..yes subjective..But age
doesnt make it sound bad..and good sound algorhimt
made 1995 is still good, and bad one made 2005 is still bad.. Techology around 1995 were already good enough to make such good synths, dsp chips were powerfull enough, and they had good enoguh AD/DA converters..
Do you think that developing good sound algoritms
were harder at those times? ITs same coding still today just possibly different platform.
And do you think
some young guy at 2005 with newest amd64 can somehow
know so much more about digital sound coding
than some korg's / roland' veteran engineer with
15 yers of experience?
New fast processor doenst make sound good,
good sound algoritms does it. And if
harware was good enough for some good sound algorhitm
, thats enough.. sure there is more possibilites
today..but are they even near fully used yet?
Certainly not.
YEs guess I am just liking that particular synth
(jp8000)..And seem you like some other synths..fine.
Guess we have right for that.
-
- KVRist
- 38 posts since 13 Feb, 2005 from Finland
Its not made by me sorry, I just think thatpustekuchen wrote:Zamson wrote:
jp8000 ...
Well after listening to that, I find it really sounds a little bit digital.
How did you redord it?
OK, ok, it is now several years old, but ...
I have a Yamaha AN1x at home, which came out approximately the same time. It sounds in my opinion much better and more "analog".
I'll try to find the demosongs an post the examples ...
.
was good soundexample what describes well
what I love in jp8000.
Yea sure do post demosons
I just hope I dont fall love with anx1 quickly
becosue I cant get all those synths I love
ever ..
-
- Banned
- 705 posts since 29 Jan, 2004
OK, as promised, here are the YAMAHA AN1X (VA hardware released 1997!!!) factory demos:
- http://test.dizainer.net/an1x/an1x_1.mp3
- http://test.dizainer.net/an1x/an1x_2.mp3
- http://test.dizainer.net/an1x/an1x_3.mp3
- http://test.dizainer.net/an1x/an1x_4.mp3
- http://test.dizainer.net/an1x/an1x_5.mp3
- http://test.dizainer.net/an1x/an1x_6.mp3
- http://test.dizainer.net/an1x/an1x_7.mp3
- http://test.dizainer.net/an1x/an1x_8.mp3
- http://test.dizainer.net/an1x/an1x_9.mp3
- http://test.dizainer.net/an1x/an1x_10.mp3
As you can hear, those are not perfectly "analog" but impressive "virtual analog" and hybrid (especially demo 4 and 8 ). That is probably intented.
(By the way: I recorded that whith normal audio cables and a cheap soundblaster card.)
Try to perform that sound (even approximately) with a Zeta or Albino or VAZ or Tera or any the other latest "state of the art" VSTis - I mean the ENTIRE sonic variousity of the AN1x ...
You wouldn't be able ...
And you probably wouldn't be able to reproduce that with SE and any resonable performance usage (if you are even a very skilled C++/Assembler SE extension module programmer...)
So why is that ??? I can only guess: It has probably to do with SOUND ARCHITECTURE and SYNTHESIS KNOWLEDGEMENT ...
Feel free to discuss!
@Zamson: Unfortunately the AN1X is no longer produced, nor available (new).
And that (still available) PLG150AN (extension plugin board) don't sound even approximately the same
.
- http://test.dizainer.net/an1x/an1x_1.mp3
- http://test.dizainer.net/an1x/an1x_2.mp3
- http://test.dizainer.net/an1x/an1x_3.mp3
- http://test.dizainer.net/an1x/an1x_4.mp3
- http://test.dizainer.net/an1x/an1x_5.mp3
- http://test.dizainer.net/an1x/an1x_6.mp3
- http://test.dizainer.net/an1x/an1x_7.mp3
- http://test.dizainer.net/an1x/an1x_8.mp3
- http://test.dizainer.net/an1x/an1x_9.mp3
- http://test.dizainer.net/an1x/an1x_10.mp3
As you can hear, those are not perfectly "analog" but impressive "virtual analog" and hybrid (especially demo 4 and 8 ). That is probably intented.
(By the way: I recorded that whith normal audio cables and a cheap soundblaster card.)
Try to perform that sound (even approximately) with a Zeta or Albino or VAZ or Tera or any the other latest "state of the art" VSTis - I mean the ENTIRE sonic variousity of the AN1x ...
You wouldn't be able ...
And you probably wouldn't be able to reproduce that with SE and any resonable performance usage (if you are even a very skilled C++/Assembler SE extension module programmer...)
So why is that ??? I can only guess: It has probably to do with SOUND ARCHITECTURE and SYNTHESIS KNOWLEDGEMENT ...
Feel free to discuss!
@Zamson: Unfortunately the AN1X is no longer produced, nor available (new).
And that (still available) PLG150AN (extension plugin board) don't sound even approximately the same
.
-
- KVRian
- 874 posts since 4 Dec, 2004 from Alabama
# I would like to hear someone try to duplicate #8 with a vstipustekuchen wrote:
So why is that ??? I can only guess: It has probably to do with SOUND ARCHITECTURE and SYNTHESIS KNOWLEDGEMENT ...
.
Regarding your theory on Sound Architechture and today's vsti's, hows about the Korg Legacy? Did Korg go down to the bottom of their talent barrel in designing the Legacy Cell? I doubt that was the case, so the Legacy Cell was designed by people with similar skills as those that design their hardware
synths. I buy more into the theory that today's computers, especially the processor and memory addressing have more to do with the level that
"state of the art" vsti's are at, rather than who is designing them. IMO, the Legacy Cell is the most impressive vsti today but even it lacks the balls of most top tier Hardware VA's. BUT if you open up several instances of any good vsti's and layer, you can achieve the level of a good hardware va.
-
- Banned
- 705 posts since 29 Jan, 2004
#8? Why?crimsontider wrote:
# I would like to hear someone try to duplicate #8 with a vsti
That's simply FM (cross modulation) and probably combined with oscillator sync (but not sure about the sync).
That's for instance one reason. There are not so many VSTis even able to perform FM and Hardsync and maybe pulse width modulation at ones...
But the main reason is probably, that hardware has mostly additional layering (multitimbre) and performance possibilities, which is very seldom with VSTis.
The AN1X for instance performs up to 2 different (morphing) voices at ones. That is one of it's secrets. The morphing is very special, because it actually don't merely morph two patches or timbres, but all the parameters between those patches are moving. That is very unique and produces unbelieveble new timbres while morphing the scenes with the rubber pad for instance.
Another secret in harware concepts is, that the oscillators are mostly NOT static, like on most VSTis. That is with the VIRUS the case and also with the AN1X. They are able to morph the oscillator spectra in realtime, which gives special analog feeling and organic sound.
But I should not tell so much of all that, because the SE "emulators" are watching here to get any clue, what is wrong with their concepts ...
To Korg:
Well. That are some really old synthesizers remodeled. Nothing else. I mean the Wavestation sounds in my ears like cheap 80's sound. Terrible digital - even like the Original.
And I am personally not that convinced by the MS20 emulation (especially the filter) ...
But they have transported an interesting concept with the Legacy Cell, which is a concept of hardware layering since decades now...
Althought, those single VSTis sound even miles better, than all the SE "emulations". That is fact.
.
-
- KVRian
- 1032 posts since 2 Aug, 2004
It seems to me that in discussions like this a lot of what are actually very different concepts become muddled.
There is success at specific emulation, success at a more general analog 'feel', and just plain old sounding good and vaguely analog in spirit. And then of course there is simply good digital with no pretension at all of any analog sound or feel.
I don't see that the ability or inability of a software synth to emulate a specific hardware sound is particularly relevant (at least to me). You could have a really shitty hardware synth whose sounds are quite unique...but simply not attractive.
In any case, I like hardware, and I like software. I just don't think that the advantages of hardware is that it sounds better - except that if you want ANALOG, then you'll probably be more satisfied with a real analog synth. And I certainly can't see any reason why in principle a computer software synth (with a good sound card) wouldn't sound as good as a hardware one, unless the hardware synth was able to muster way more processing power. But, then, in some very finite amount of time, the softsynths would overtake it in that respect.
There is success at specific emulation, success at a more general analog 'feel', and just plain old sounding good and vaguely analog in spirit. And then of course there is simply good digital with no pretension at all of any analog sound or feel.
I don't see that the ability or inability of a software synth to emulate a specific hardware sound is particularly relevant (at least to me). You could have a really shitty hardware synth whose sounds are quite unique...but simply not attractive.
In any case, I like hardware, and I like software. I just don't think that the advantages of hardware is that it sounds better - except that if you want ANALOG, then you'll probably be more satisfied with a real analog synth. And I certainly can't see any reason why in principle a computer software synth (with a good sound card) wouldn't sound as good as a hardware one, unless the hardware synth was able to muster way more processing power. But, then, in some very finite amount of time, the softsynths would overtake it in that respect.