KVR Audio

mevla · Post by **mevla** » Tue Jul 03, 2018 12:52 pm

I know, I mentioned it as part of the 2.0 beta testing.

BONES · Post by **BONES** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 12:22 am

nichttuntun wrote:I strongly advice to take the manual, a day off and then work for a whole day through everything. This thing is so rewarding and exceptional. I did that and now I love that thing and it's deepness. As I learned the synth more and tweaked and tried out I came across sooo many freaky and cool sounds I could have made a complete sample bank for further mangling via granular or whatnot. This thing is simply brilliant but you have definitely to invest in it.

That's all well and good but there are probably dozens of other synths with similar possibilities that don't require you to take a day off work just to get started. That's the thing, it's a very crowded, competitive marketplace and most of us are very time-poor so we'll naturally gravitate towards things that we don't have to struggle against and can start using straight away. I'm talking generally here, not specifically about Waverazor, which seems easy enough to get some usable, nasty sounds from. It's just seems to me that too many devs don't understand this.

pekbro · Post by **pekbro** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 1:37 am

Yeah but its not really like other synths, if you're looking for something that
is not out of the ordinary, Waverazor probably isn't for you. I for one appreciate
complexity and it's implications.

-Cheers

*Anyway, I doubt theres much they could do to simplify things beyond eliminating
options for the user.

BONES · Post by **BONES** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 3:17 am

I don't even know what that means. I'm looking for sounds to use in songs. I can get some completely useless sounds out of pretty much any synth, so out of the ordinary as to be unmusical. It's not hard, it doesn't require 128 modulators. I really don't understand how people get so caught up in how a synth makes its sound. Surely the only thing that matters is the sound itself? Given that, I've not heard anything in Waverazor to make it stand out in a way that would make me interested in it, certainly nothing to make it worth more than three times the price of Go2, for example, which is also very capable when it comes to filthy, nasty out of the ordinary sounds.

pekbro · Post by **pekbro** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 4:10 am

Definitely its expensive, which is why I bought it during the intro period.
Dunno if I would pay full price for it myself. As for its sound, I think it
can produce nice musical sounds if you want. Although, personally, I
bought it to produce distinctly non-musical sounds. And yes, I am
interested in the way it makes its sound and in what it can do to my
existing sounds that cant be accomplished in any other way.

Granted, for many though, Waverazor is likely not going to the best choice.

nichttuntun · Post by **nichttuntun** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 4:33 am

BONES wrote:I don't even know what that means. I'm looking for sounds to use in songs. I can get some completely useless sounds out of pretty much any synth, so out of the ordinary as to be unmusical. It.

I have a different approach based on enjoying sound in general. Therefore I think there is nothing like an useless sound. And no you can't compare WAVERAZOR the way you do. It's an exordinary instrument and there are people who appreciate that.

I am in the joy of not to have to make "songs" or "music". I am just doing things with sounds while having a free beginners mind every day anew. In the mind of a beginner there are a lot of possibilities. WAVERAZOR is an instrument which starts where many others have already stopped

r_mok · Post by **r_mok** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 8:59 am

nichttuntun wrote:
mevla wrote:I find that 2.0.2 has a lot of sounds and waves with clicks in them. A bit annoying. But this is all superseded by the need to have a UI that one can look at for long periods of time w/o getting eye soreness. I mean, small choppy italic fonts in a fixed sized UI meant for low resolution monitors ? Especially for a synth that's so different and time must be spent at to learn it.
Hi. Be assured they have it on their to do list and as I learned they will provide a re-sizability function in the future. Please be patient. I understand the need here. I have contacted Rob and Taiho for that matter too. You can always mail them or post at their forum. They are totally responsive and very open for suggestions and they are very close to their customers. Support is very very good and the two are open minded and kind.

@melva : thanks for reminding me of the waves with clicks that you mentioned. I can't seem to find your post in the beta forum for that, but I'd love to get that understood and sorted, if you have time to point me in the right direction... and apologies, my memory just ain't what it used to be

As for the resizing, this is pretty much at the top of my list these days and am working on a solution for this. Hopefully this is not too far off ...

nichttuntun · Post by **nichttuntun** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 9:27 am

Guys, you are the greatest

mcbpete · Post by **mcbpete** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 9:33 am

r_mok - Any chance of a few more colour themes in future? Been using the monochrome/grayscale one since it was available as all the others burn a hole in my retina !

r_mok · Post by **r_mok** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 10:24 am

mcbpete wrote:r_mok - Any chance of a few more colour themes in future? Been using the monochrome/grayscale one since it was available as all the others burn a hole in my retina !

Sure! I put a lot of new ones in there during the 2.0 work, as I like experimenting to see what different combinations look like. Ideally, someday, I just want to open up the skinning so users can pick their own colours... for now, it's in code though. Any particular colour direction/specifics you are looking for?

nichttuntun · Post by **nichttuntun** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 10:50 am

r_mok wrote:
mcbpete wrote:r_mok - Any chance of a few more colour themes in future? Been using the monochrome/grayscale one since it was available as all the others burn a hole in my retina !
Sure! I put a lot of new ones in there during the 2.0 work, as I like experimenting to see what different combinations look like. Ideally, someday, I just want to open up the skinning so users can pick their own colours... for now, it's in code though. Any particular colour direction/specifics you are looking for?

To individually choose it would be fantastic. It would be great too if especially for red- green (every third male has it) and colour blind people would be a skin ready. This is becoming more popular in the gaming industry. Thank you for caring and sharing the information.

mevla · Post by **mevla** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 11:24 am

r_mok wrote:@melva : thanks for reminding me of the waves with clicks that you mentioned. I can't seem to find your post in the beta forum for that, but I'd love to get that understood and sorted, if you have time to point me in the right direction... and apologies, my memory just ain't what it used to be

Hi Rob, yes, I nearly posted in the beta forum as I'm quite busy these days. Being on KVR briefly, I thought of dropping a mention here. Will try to post complete details later on today (if not, tomorrow) and I would like to produce a sound sample if possible to record these.

Regarding the UI and more specifically the fonts, wouldn't having solid fonts instead of what appears to be slanted fonts help in providing a focused definition of the UI ?

Cheers.

nix808 · Post by **nix808** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 4:06 pm

So what's the new form of synthesis?
...apart from MOK Waverazor synthesis?

Looks truly sick to me, wanna it

BONES · Post by **BONES** » Sat Jul 07, 2018 2:17 am

nichttuntun wrote:And no you can't compare WAVERAZOR the way you do. It's an exordinary instrument and there are people who appreciate that.

Yes, those are probably the people I generally refer to as "idiots". People who have lost sight of the fact that we should all be here to make music, not to obsess over every detail of the tools we use to do it. And of course I can assess Waverazor from that point of view, it's the only valid one there is. Sounds are important, the tools you use to get them really aren't at the end of the day, beyond how well they expedite the process.

I am in the joy of not to have to make "songs" or "music". I am just doing things with sounds while having a free beginners mind every day anew.
So what you're saying is that you are a clueless fool who thinks he can tell experienced musicians/producers song writers how to do their job. Can you see the problem with that?
In the mind of a beginner there are a lot of possibilities. WAVERAZOR is an instrument which starts where many others have already stopped

I'd be very surprised if you could see a fraction of the possibilities an experienced person can, especially if you think this thing starts where others stop. The overlap with every other synth out there is probably at least 75% and it is likely the other 25% goes in favour of the other synth, not Waverazor.

nichttuntun · Post by **nichttuntun** » Sun Jul 08, 2018 1:01 pm

BONES wrote:"idiots", "lost sight", "the fact that we should all be here to make music", "obsess over every detail", "only valid one"

Hi Bones,
maybe there is a bit too much assumption, pre-defined categorized thinking and an attitude based on expectation involved which could be a reason for such an answer.

This IS a Waverazor thread. I think it is okay to go into detail with the VST Waverazor.

BONES wrote:So what you're saying is that you are a clueless fool who thinks he can tell experienced musicians/producers song writers how to do their job. Can you see the problem with that?

There is no problem. There occurs revealing of what could happen if someone is stuck too much into concepts and to what divergent answers this could lead.

Here is the whole sentence:
In the professionals mind there are few possibilities. In the mind of a beginner there are many.

Your answer shows what could happen if an "experienced" person looses a beginners mind.

BONES wrote:I'd be very surprised if you could see a fraction of the possibilities an experienced person can, especially if you think this thing starts where others stop. The overlap with every other synth out there is probably at least 75% and it is likely the other 25% goes in favour of the other synth, not Waverazor.

Not at all. I am into synth programming and sound-design, projects and bands since early 90th.

And now back to the Waverazor synth according to the topic:
Maybe you can name one synth in which you can have 3 OSC layers in which every layer can have a total of 16 wavesegments and every segment can be modulated seperately. WAVERAZOR is like a Eurorack modular system with a lot of modules and all packed in one non- compromised deep dimensional VST package.

Waverazor is for sure no kind of THE THE and no FAITH NO MORE and no PEARL JAM and no HENRY ROLLINS and no BACK STREET BOYS and no SIOUXIE AND THE BANSHEES and no BAUHAUS and no JOY DEVISION and no WILCO-synth. It is more a STOCKHAUSEN, a ROBERT FRIPP, a RADIOHEAD, a THROBBING GRISTLE, a SKINNY PUPPY, a DAVID SYLVIAN, a STEVE JANSEN synth.

I think you maybe could appreciate now, that no one asked you about the definition of your "the fact that we should all be here to make music". Have a joyful time making music, whatever that means for you and maybe you could lay down your evaluations based on your personal preferences and leave deriving general conditions out of them which you try to mantle over things. Scales based on such a positions are illusions based on trained concepts over many years. As a "experienced" person making "music" you maybe should rather get rid of such. That could take years but it´s rewarding like nothing else in life...

...and it helps a lot when communicating with other people and to stay focused.