KVR Audio

EvilDragon · Post by **EvilDragon** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 12:34 pm

kmonkey wrote: I think developers can see how their social "adventure" of pushing monophonic instrument as "it gotta be monophonic" went down to toilet.

Obviously not since they're all still selling pretty well.

urosh · Post by **urosh** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 12:34 pm

Ingonator wrote:
urosh wrote: 1) FX chain would have to be polyphonic as well, which might be doable but would be dubious
If that is true using exernal FXs with polyphonic synths would not make any sense. A lot of artists actually use guitar pedal FXs with polyphonic synths...

???
I'm obviously talking about internal FX in Repro, where parameters are modulatable by envelopes and similar (defacto per voice) mod sources.

EvilDragon · Post by **EvilDragon** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 12:34 pm

Yeah.

Ingonator · Post by **Ingonator** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 12:39 pm

EvilDragon wrote:Hmmm... Repro-1 fully cranking (all effects on, high resonance etc) never goes above 6-8% CPU here. Granted, I have latest generation i7-6700K running at 4.5 GHz

Ingonator wrote:
urosh wrote: 1) FX chain would have to be polyphonic as well, which might be doable but would be dubious
If that is true using exernal FXs with polyphonic synths would not make any sense. A lot of artists actually use guitar pedal FXs with polyphonic synths...
But effects in Repro-1 are MODULATABLE, and in order to keep that on a polyphonic synth, you'd need that FX chain duplicated per voice. Which won't happen.

How many vintage polyphonyic anlalog synths actually had built-in effects besides e.g. a Chorus and i doubt that Chorus was always done per voice. With the Prophet 5 you had to use external FXs and those were not per voice for sure. Same is true when using external FX plugins as alraedy mentioned.

IMO the FXs in Repro-1 would still work in a poly mode if they would be global and not per voice. actually when not used "per voice" it wouldmbe even more "authentic" if we speak about a Prophet 5 with external FXs...

chk071 · Post by **chk071** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 12:39 pm

EvilDragon wrote:
kmonkey wrote: I think developers can see how their social "adventure" of pushing monophonic instrument as "it gotta be monophonic" went down to toilet.
Obviously not since they're all still selling pretty well.

Do you mean the analog monophonics? I frankly can't imagine how, except for the people who buying everything with u-he on it, and people who are in love with the Pro-1, many people will buy RePro-1. At the very least, i would think that it is not their top-selling synth. Just my guess without knowing it better, but, let's say, i'd be damned if that is so.

EvilDragon · Post by **EvilDragon** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 12:41 pm

Who mentioned anything about "top selling"? I just said selling. And praised for accuracy of emulation, while at it, too (Repro, Monark, Legend, and Roland's monophonic plug-outs).

urosh · Post by **urosh** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 12:42 pm

It's almost some people that vociferously advocate poly Repro have not actually used Repro (as-it-is-right-now) very much (or at all). Weird.

EvilDragon · Post by **EvilDragon** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 12:45 pm

It's also this:

AnX · Post by **AnX** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 12:47 pm

Ive got polyphony in ALL my plugins. No probs here.

4damind · Post by **4damind** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 12:48 pm

I agree with Ingo.
Some of this limitations are more the idea of the developers and not based on technical limitations.
IMO the time is over for this 1:1 emulations without a "back panel" to add some useful features like a modulation matrix, some effects, maybe unison and more voices.

Arturia does this very well, Synapse too. The only "problem" I see with Repro-1 is that U-He will have not so many sales as expected, because some (many?) people waiting now for the Repro-5 which will not have this limitations. The opposite is Diva.. many features, stuff you cannot make with a 1:1 emulation _and_ very good emulations. As Urs stated in a thread it's the synth where they have the most sales and which brings the money. This sums it up: give the user the features they ask for and you will have a lot of sales and happy users

exmatproton · Post by **exmatproton** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 12:48 pm

urosh wrote:It's almost some people that vociferously advocate poly Repro have not actually used Repro (as-it-is-right-now) very much (or at all). Weird.

The first thing i did when i bought Repro-1, is make a poly patch in Reaper and in Patcher (Image Line).

I agree that U-He did quite a good job explaining why this particular synth has been made in a mono fashion. However, i don't think mono synths have "extra" strong points. Not in this time of age. It just isn't necessary at all.

People who disagree with this are imho "stuck" in an era/way of working that isn't necessary at all anymore. And i mean this in the most respectful way. I don't care about mono synths. Not 1 bit.

Repro-1 has awesome FX, OSC's and filters. That's the reason i bought it, but i never use it monophonic.

People who are using it monophonic (and think i am wrong); enjoy

People who are using it polyphonic (and think i am right); enjoy

Either way, U-He did such a fine job with this synth.

EvilDragon · Post by **EvilDragon** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 12:53 pm

4damind wrote:Some of this limitations are more the idea of the developers and not based on technical limitations.

If you read Urs' post carefully, it was NEVER about technical limitations. It was about what the synth lends itself to BEST (in case of Monark it's even more evident - it sounds so thick and has a kind of girth that REALLY doesn't lend itself that well to polyphony, so Mike Daliot was right to choose to make it monophonic only... and the case is very similar with Repro-1, too).

Ingonator · Post by **Ingonator** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 12:55 pm

urosh wrote:It's almost some people that vociferously advocate poly Repro have not actually used Repro (as-it-is-right-now) very much (or at all). Weird.

Well i have used Repro-1 since first day of the public Beta and also bought it during that time. Besides that i owned Arturia Prophet V (including their Prophet 5 emulation) since around 2006 while it was updated a few times since then.

Using Arturia Prophet V3 as a reference (+ original patch sheets and audio demos) I had even re-programmed a bunch of Prophet 5 presets in Repro-1 that i posted at the U-He sub-forum.
Opposing to the opinions of some of the typical Arturia haters Prophet V was not really bad in compariosn, especially if some bass boosting was applied (with an EQ or a dedicated bass boosting plugin).

Actually it would be more likely that i would sell Repro-1 instead of Prophet V3 (while currently i got this as a part of V-Collection 5).

Anyway besides that a dedicated proper Prophet 5 emulation with the same quality as Repro-1 would be still very cool while at the same time also a polyphonic Pro One would be graet to have even if it sounds differently to a Prophet 5.

I had owned a real Minimoog Model D long time ago and with The Legend (after having used a lot of other Minimoog emulations before...) i got the IMO best emulation of this now. I was also very happy that a polyphonic mode was included there which IMO is really useful and offers new options concerning sound design and applications with The Legend.

During i owned a Moog Slim Phatty i was able to play a Little Phatty + Slim Phatty poly-chain (5 voices if i remember correctly) at Musikmese and actually foudn this really cool.
Even the Moog Voyager seemed to be able to create a poly-chain but of course this would have been very expensive to own this (even if there were the cheaper Voyager racks).

wagtunes · Post by **wagtunes** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 1:01 pm

Here's what I do know. Some of my patches using the Jaws FX are so dirty and thick that the same patch, with polyphony, would sound like literal garbage. It would be nothing but noise. I don't even want to know what this patch, which pins my needle at 30%, would do to my PC with 5 voices of polyphony.

Personally, I'm not hung up at all about the polyphony realism, faithful to the old, whatever nonsense. I don't care about that stuff. As far as I'm concerned, I wish every synth was polyphonic. But I can absolutely see why keeping Repro-1 monophonic was the better option here and it has nothing to do with sales. I just think of polyphonic version would have to be stripped down and modified too much to keep it the same sounding synth. So when I bought it, I had to make sure that the sound of what this thing makes (which is unlike any synth I own) was enough to overcome the fact that I would only be able to play one note at a time.

For me, it was enough and I bought it.

YMMV.

Ingonator · Post by **Ingonator** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 1:05 pm

wagtunes wrote:Here's what I do know. Some of my patches using the Jaws FX are so dirty and thick that the same patch, with polyphony, would sound like literal garbage. It would be nothing but noise. I don't even want to know what this patch, which pins my needle at 30%, would do to my PC with 5 voices of polyphony.

Nobody would force you to use the Jaws FX with a polyphonic version of you do not like the result. At the same time others would maybe like the result. Somehow Schwa Olga comes to my mind now. and i got the Oligarc FX Suite here including the Olga Drive FX...

For doing sound design "from scratch" having an option for polyphony would make sense for sure. like it did with The Legend.

Synapse Audio Minimoog emulation "The Legend" for VST/AU and RE released!