u-he rePro in the works

[pdxindy]

Now, if U-he came out with a hardware synth that had Diva, Zebra, Bazille, ACE and Hive in it...

How well did the Arturia Origin sell again..?

I said it would at least interest me... not that I thought it was a smart financial idea

[pdxindy]

The hardware "problem" (AFAIK, they only had that "problem" with the Origin, but not with the later "Brute" series - there goes your "shitty" theory) resides in the fact that people who want hardware want the immediacy of the old hardware interfaces, and that doesn't coexist well with the complexities of modern synths. If U-he decided to follow that path, they would probably face the same problem, and would have to build a synth with a large LCD and menus driven by touch, probably. And then they would be facing the exact same problem Arturia faced. Some concepts simply cannot be transposed (or will be quite hard to transpose) from software to hardware.

Exactly... Zebra would be a nightmare to create hardware for.

And if it is only Diva... Even there, the existing modules are rather different from each other so there would have to be generic controls that change function. There goes 1:1 functionality, which is one of the main strengths of hardware.

I would also hate for software Diva to be constrained for future module additions by a fixed set of hardware controls in the hardware version...

[pdxindy]

One other negative for me... I am planning to get a Linnstrument. U-he (almost) supports MPE note per midi channel. At least for me, the new generation of expressive controllers such as the Linnstrument and Seaboard Rise are the future of expressive playing.

At this point I wouldn't buy a hardware keyboard synth unless it was an innovative MPE controller.

[glokraw]

The hardware "problem" (AFAIK, they only had that "problem" with the Origin, but not with the later "Brute" series - there goes your "shitty" theory)

There were/are design problems with some arturia midi controllers that
received lots of attention when bundled with bitwig. The bad rap
will be carried over to other products in the market, even if the keybeds
and other hardware were of different origin.
They failed to pull a known faulty product off the shelves,
and have a dent in their reputation to show for it. 'Low end' is not an excuse for shoddy.

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/electro ... roken.html

[david.beholder]

Besides not wanting U-he to spend lots of time on things other than new and existing soft synths... I think now is a bad time for a hardware version.

I think we're in the end of HW craze too. Vintage synths prices driving release of really good sounding new analog hardware say P6 and Minilogue. All we need is couple more analog polys in different segments.

[Urs]

All our current products are designed to be software products. Should we ever consider doing a hardware synthesizer, we'd design that as a hardware synth and it wouldn't be the same as any of the softs.

That said, if you'd ask me if I'd rather build a VA or an analogue synth I think I'd answer latter.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

What is the problems we're trying to solve for with the idea of Urs hardware? Do folks want hardware for live performance? Inspiration? Tactile response? Do you need a good synth? Or perhaps just a controller that fulfills a need that current controllers are not?

I'd love to be able to fire up a synth without needing a computer, but I'd much rather have a good keyboard controller with enough knobs, faders, and buttons to properly program and preform a synth like Diva. I don't necessarily need that requirement filled by U-he though.

[nevernamed]

And regarding the point about Arturia I understand what you mean. I just think that's a shitty company and I can't help but wonder how much of their problem with hardware has been due to their bad reputation in software.

The Arturia "bad" reputation resides only in your head (and other pinprick heads). They are a good company that makes very good software instruments, that many use.
The hardware "problem" (AFAIK, they only had that "problem" with the Origin, but not with the later "Brute" series - there goes your "shitty" theory) resides in the fact that people who want hardware want the immediacy of the old hardware interfaces, and that doesn't coexist well with the complexities of modern synths. If U-he decided to follow that path, they would probably face the same problem, and would have to build a synth with a large LCD and menus driven by touch, probably. And then they would be facing the exact same problem Arturia faced. Some concepts simply cannot be transposed (or will be quite hard to transpose) from software to hardware.

Utter bollocks. They're a shitty company. This assessment is based on the back of my experience with the V collection. The only synths that would repeatedly crash the host application. They've had years to get that right. Just a few weeks ago I was playing around with their Oberheim SEM in Pro Tools. It crashed Pro Tools twice. Once on changing a preset and the second time, immediately after actually, was while sweeping between the Low Pass and the High Pass filter repeatedly. I have no tolerance for that kind of stuff anymore and like I said it isn't as if they didn't have enough time to sort this out. A u-he product has never once caused a crash in the host application. Their reliability record is flawless. The V collection is atrociously unreliable. They have a history of starting new projects before they've stabilised existing projects as well. I want nothing to do with them.

A hardware synth is a different proposition. You don't approach it through the prism of porting existing software concepts. You have to come up with a concept and design it from the ground up.

[WolfKay]

That said, if you'd ask me if I'd rather build a VA or an analogue synth I think I'd answer latter.

May I ask you why?
Do you feel there are sonic territories left to be explored in analog synthesis, something radically different from the sounds we're used to for decades now?
Or would you just be curious to practice your skills in a non-VA environment?
Or…

[WolfKay]

[sorry, double post]

[Urs]

That said, if you'd ask me if I'd rather build a VA or an analogue synth I think I'd answer latter.

May I ask you why?
Do you feel there are sonic territories left to be explored in analog synthesis, something radically different from the sounds we're used to for decades now?
Or would you just be curious to practice your skills in a non-VA environment?
Or…

Dunno. But yes, analogue has not yet been fully explored. IMHO there's still soem funky stuff that begs to be done. Well, the same goes for VA I guess

[fmr]

Utter bollocks. They're a shitty company. This assessment is based on the back of my experience with the V collection. The only synths that would repeatedly crash the host application. They've had years to get that right. Just a few weeks ago I was playing around with their Oberheim SEM in Pro Tools. It crashed Pro Tools twice. Once on changing a preset and the second time, immediately after actually, was while sweeping between the Low Pass and the High Pass filter repeatedly. I have no tolerance for that kind of stuff anymore and like I said it isn't as if they didn't have enough time to sort this out. A u-he product has never once caused a crash in the host application. Their reliability record is flawless. The V collection is atrociously unreliable. They have a history of starting new projects before they've stabilised existing projects as well. I want nothing to do with them.

So, you classify a virtual instrument builder as "shitty" just because they happen to have a synth that crashes Pro Tools. Big news for you: I have many synths here that crash Pro Tools. Actually, Pro Tools is prone to crash with MANY plug-ins. So, are they all SHITTY companies, or is it Pro Tools fault? Digidesign/Avid have been launching "shitty" software for a very long time already (as using your own parameters). Evaluating a company performance based on the way a single software instrument behaves in Pro Tools is "shitty" argument. When here are so many software instruments doing badly in Pro Tools, and doing well in other hosts, whose to blame? The instruments, or the host?

[buescher]

Dunno. But yes, analogue has not yet been fully explored. IMHO there's still soem funky stuff that begs to be done...

given the attention you give to Occs and Filters, an analogue synth could be special.

[tungee78]

The Lokomotiv synth is also held simple, but the sound is incredible good.
Drive and filter sections are one of the best sounding imo. Lokomotiv is also a CPU-Hog!
If this will go in the same direction (soundwise), count me in!

[ImNotDedYet]

Utter bollocks. They're a shitty company. This assessment is based on the back of my experience with the V collection. The only synths that would repeatedly crash the host application. They've had years to get that right. Just a few weeks ago I was playing around with their Oberheim SEM in Pro Tools. It crashed Pro Tools twice. Once on changing a preset and the second time, immediately after actually, was while sweeping between the Low Pass and the High Pass filter repeatedly. I have no tolerance for that kind of stuff anymore and like I said it isn't as if they didn't have enough time to sort this out. A u-he product has never once caused a crash in the host application. Their reliability record is flawless. The V collection is atrociously unreliable. They have a history of starting new projects before they've stabilised existing projects as well. I want nothing to do with them.

So, you classify a virtual instrument builder as "shitty" just because they happen to have a synth that crashes Pro Tools. Big news for you: I have many synths here that crash Pro Tools. Actually, Pro Tools is prone to crash with MANY plug-ins. So, are they all SHITTY companies, or is it Pro Tools fault? Digidesign/Avid have been launching "shitty" software for a very long time already (as using your own parameters). Evaluating a company performance based on the way a single software instrument behaves in Pro Tools is "shitty" argument. When here are so many software instruments doing badly in Pro Tools, and doing well in other hosts, whose to blame? The instruments, or the host?

They've got a few pieces of hardware that many would consider shoddy quality/support/firmware as well.

I don't have any Arturia products, so I can't speak from experience. But, they've made their bed it would seem. Hopefully they get a new bed because their upcoming hardware synth looks incredible.