Repro-1 (out now)

[wagtunes]

At least we can hope for a Repro-1 OSC in december with the beta version.

+1

Given how much CPU this thing uses, I don't even see how that's possible unless they allowed us to freeze every single track. I seriously doubt most people could run more than 5 or 6 instances of this thing before their CPUs started coughing up blood.

Next week another Beta is out that should reduce CPU load quite a lot.

Even at that, for pads, you're going to have to have 3 to 5 instances just to do simple chords. I mean you've got people right now doing OSCs with 30 to 40 tracks or more. I'm up to 30 on my latest. There is no way on God's green Earth that we're going to be able to come anywhere near those numbers with this thing. In fact, I did a song recently that was 30 tracks in total. 3 tracks, one of them this synth, and the other 2 Omnisphere, accounted for 80% of the CPU load with this synth alone accounting for 20%. I actually had to start freezing tracks at 30 and that's with all other synths hardly putting a dent in CPU load.

Like I said, I just don't see this happening. I mean it's not like with Diva where you've at least got a draft mode.

But you can do full songs with way less tracks.
Also i think U-he will do what they can to reduce it as much as possible but i think sometimes it's better to leave old cpu's, OS etc. behind because it break the future.
There are plenty synths for low cpu usage.
This one is lurking for faster processors
But i could run about 8-12 instances on my medium fast notebook. It's way more than i thought.

Of course you can do songs with less tracks. I've done songs with 2 tracks. I just don't think the folks who normally participate in the OSC, many of whom don't own state of the art computers, are either going to be able to do much of anything at all or be content with doing a song containing a half dozen tracks, if that many.

And nobody is talking about this synth being a problem for normal use. I'm talking about the OSC specifically where you have very strict rules on what you can and can't do. For the OSC (not anything else) I do not feel that this is a viable synth. I think it will give lots of people fits and we will end up having the lowest number of entries since doing the OSC. I'm even willing to bet on that.

[ImNotDedYet]

Of course you can do songs with less tracks. I've done songs with 2 tracks. I just don't think the folks who normally participate in the OSC, many of whom don't own state of the art computers, are either going to be able to do much of anything at all or be content with doing a song containing a half dozen tracks, if that many.

And nobody is talking about this synth being a problem for normal use. I'm talking about the OSC specifically where you have very strict rules on what you can and can't do. For the OSC (not anything else) I do not feel that this is a viable synth. I think it will give lots of people fits and we will end up having the lowest number of entries since doing the OSC. I'm even willing to bet on that.

Some of the best jazz tunes were made with two or three monophonic instruments and a few different drums in a drum kit. When given limitations, it provides opportunity to work on "breaking out of the box" There are a number of ways to provide harmonic sounds and structure with a monophonic instrument or two.

[Chris-S]

Even at that, for pads, you're going to have to have 3 to 5 instances just to do simple chords.

One can use ARPs instead of chords.

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

Of course you can do songs with less tracks. I've done songs with 2 tracks. I just don't think the folks who normally participate in the OSC, many of whom don't own state of the art computers, are either going to be able to do much of anything at all or be content with doing a song containing a half dozen tracks, if that many.

And nobody is talking about this synth being a problem for normal use. I'm talking about the OSC specifically where you have very strict rules on what you can and can't do. For the OSC (not anything else) I do not feel that this is a viable synth. I think it will give lots of people fits and we will end up having the lowest number of entries since doing the OSC. I'm even willing to bet on that.

Pretty sure it isn't against the rules to freeze tracks, while building the project. Then just unfreeze and render at top settings. Pretty sure I had to do that when I entered the OSC 'Diva' contest

[EvilDragon]

Can run a dozen Repros here easily, I suspect I'll be able to load twice as much with the new beta. Or perhaps more.

Just gotta have a good CPU and all is well.

[wagtunes]

Of course you can do songs with less tracks. I've done songs with 2 tracks. I just don't think the folks who normally participate in the OSC, many of whom don't own state of the art computers, are either going to be able to do much of anything at all or be content with doing a song containing a half dozen tracks, if that many.

And nobody is talking about this synth being a problem for normal use. I'm talking about the OSC specifically where you have very strict rules on what you can and can't do. For the OSC (not anything else) I do not feel that this is a viable synth. I think it will give lots of people fits and we will end up having the lowest number of entries since doing the OSC. I'm even willing to bet on that.

Pretty sure it isn't against the rules to freeze tracks, while building the project. Then just unfreeze and render at top settings. Pretty sure I had to do that when I entered the OSC 'Diva' contest

Well, I don't know what kind of a DAW you have but if I have enough tracks to hit 100% CPU usage, if I try to unfreeze and render, my DAW freezes up. I have to render WITH the frozen tracks. Now, if they'll allow THAT, sure, no problem. I can do 100 tracks of any synth.

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

Of course you can do songs with less tracks. I've done songs with 2 tracks. I just don't think the folks who normally participate in the OSC, many of whom don't own state of the art computers, are either going to be able to do much of anything at all or be content with doing a song containing a half dozen tracks, if that many.

And nobody is talking about this synth being a problem for normal use. I'm talking about the OSC specifically where you have very strict rules on what you can and can't do. For the OSC (not anything else) I do not feel that this is a viable synth. I think it will give lots of people fits and we will end up having the lowest number of entries since doing the OSC. I'm even willing to bet on that.

Pretty sure it isn't against the rules to freeze tracks, while building the project. Then just unfreeze and render at top settings. Pretty sure I had to do that when I entered the OSC 'Diva' contest

Well, I don't know what kind of a DAW you have but if I have enough tracks to hit 100% CPU usage, if I try to unfreeze and render, my DAW freezes up. I have to render WITH the frozen tracks. Now, if they'll allow THAT, sure, no problem. I can do 100 tracks of any synth.

As far as I remember, you are not allowed to bounce to audio and then manipulate the sounds. In this case, you would just freeze the tracks at the highest quality the instrument outputs, then bounce out the mp3 while everything is frozen

Like I said, when the Diva OSC ran, I was using a 5-year old core2duo with 3gig ram. I can't imagine that I got very far without freezing/ Mind you, my track count wouldn't have been that high

Just raise the question in the OSC discussion thread

[Ned Bouhalassa]

Hello everybodies!

I have a little demo track to share with youz - all REPRO, all delicious! Thanks U-He for another synth home-run.

https://soundcloud.com/ned-bouhalassa/r ... pro-1-demo

[Made In Machines]

A few things:

1) Are you working on alternate filter settings? I don't really like how much bass you lose as soon as you apply some resonance so If you could bypass the bass drop off that would be very nice. I notice you can get under the hood and change the oscillators from clean and some other things so maybe you're planning to do it already? That under the hood interface is really cool!

2) Polyphony - Don't be mean! We all want a poly pro one if we can have one!

[glokraw]

Will you give us a warning when it's coming out of beta, so we can get the intro price before it bumps up?

Waiting is like playing a game of rushing roulette with your $30

[EvilDragon]

I don't really like how much bass you lose as soon as you apply some resonance so If you could bypass the bass drop off that would be very nice.

Err, well that won't happen because that's how the original behaved, too. It's like you never used a real ladder filter design, they all have bass drop-off with increased resonance. That's just how things are. Need bass intact? Use a different synth, or use Sonic Conditioner in Repro-1 to compensate this a bit. But that bass drop-off is a characteristic of ladder filter design and that's that.

[Ingonator]

I don't really like how much bass you lose as soon as you apply some resonance so If you could bypass the bass drop off that would be very nice.

Err, well that won't happen because that's how the original behaved, too. It's like you never used a real ladder filter design, they all have bass drop-off with increased resonance. That's just how things are. Need bass intact? Use a different synth, or use Sonic Conditioner in Repro-1 to compensate this a bit. But that bass drop-off is a characteristic of ladder filter design and that's that.

With state variable filters like e.g. the SEM you could mostly keep the bass at high resonance but with ladder filter it will be indeed decreased with higher resonance.

With a state variable filter like the SEM the output could also get louder with higher reonance while wit ha ladder filter it gets more quiet.

The Uhbie filter in U-He Diva seems to be inspired by the SEM filter and the loudness is increasing with more Resonance there, same with Arturia SEM V2. With both the Bass seems to stay mostly same with high Resonance or is even increased.

With the Acid filter in my Bass Station II which is a diode ladder filter the output seems to get louder with incresaed resonance too and the bass seems to be mostly kept too.

Opposing to most ladder filters like in e.g. a Minimoog or Pro One the state variable filter in the SEM, the Uhbie filter in Diva and also the Acid (diode ladder) filter in the BS II do not seem capable of self-oscillation (the Classic filter in the BS II could self-oscillate).
A SEM based filter design was also in the OB-X and the new OB-6 (the OB-8, OB-Xa and OB-SX used CEM3320 filter chips like in the Pro One so they are different) which is a reason why both do not seem to be able of self-oscillation (same also seems to be true for the free OBXD softsynth).

[EvilDragon]

Well, Pro-One doesn't have a diode ladder nor a state-variable filter, so that about closes that particular "issue". It's not meant to retain bass with increasing resonance.


BTW, there's no reason why state-variables can't self-oscillate. It's a matter of limiting the feedback in the filter topology. That the SEM didn't have it is a matter of its design.

[Ingonator]

Well, Pro-One doesn't have a diode ladder nor a state-variable filter, so that about closes that particular "issue". It's not meant to retain bass with increasing resonance.

This is more otrless what i just explained while my post above was a bit more detailed.

BTW, there's no reason why state-variables can't self-oscillate. It's a matter of limiting the feedback in the filter topology. That the SEM didn't have it is a matter of its design.

This is indeed correct but the SEM seems to be most popular state variable filter and the Uhbie filter in Diva while maybe not thought as a proper 1:1 emulation is at least inspired by it and has comparable features like e.g. morphing between filter modes.

State variable filters seem to be mostly multimode filters while not every multimode filter is a state variable filter.

[AnX]

...so anyway, back to repro1....