Cherry Audio's CA2600 is available NOW!

[rezoneight]

Shitty tutorial video as he doesn't show where the mod wheel is or various other settings (for the love of god show the full panel). However this sound is totally doable in The Legend so not sure why it wouldn't be doable in other VIs.

[OscSync]

Shitty tutorial video as he doesn't show where the mod wheel is or various other settings (for the love of god show the full panel). However this sound is totally doable in The Legend so not sure why it wouldn't be doable in other VIs.

Are you referring to the Automatic Gainsay video I posted or the Minimoog one from chk?
Assume chk's given your Legend comment.

[rezoneight]

Shitty tutorial video as he doesn't show where the mod wheel is or various other settings (for the love of god show the full panel). However this sound is totally doable in The Legend so not sure why it wouldn't be doable in other VIs.

Are you referring to the Automatic Gainsay video I posted or the Minimoog one from chk?
Assume chk's given your Legend comment.

Minimoog but it was Examigan that posted the link.

[OscSync]

Shitty tutorial video as he doesn't show where the mod wheel is or various other settings (for the love of god show the full panel). However this sound is totally doable in The Legend so not sure why it wouldn't be doable in other VIs.

Are you referring to the Automatic Gainsay video I posted or the Minimoog one from chk?
Assume chk's given your Legend comment.

Minimoog but it was Examigan that posted the link.

Ah sorry guys.

[ELEX]

I'm trying to recreate this patch from Automatic Gainsay however I'm nowhere even close. Specifically the second one in the video...

On the subject of that second patch: what it's doing with pulsewidth is simply not possible with CA2600, which doesn't allow for as narrow a pulse as that patch seems to use. Minimum PW on CA2600 is about 10% when 'initial pulsewidth' set to maximum. It won't get narrower that that. The settings in your patch actually increase PW ! ( seems the modulator is folded rather than clipped ) In the video PW is on or near minimum and modulation is subtracted from that, which on my Behringer 2600 hardware clone is possible and yields an even narrower pulse, to the point of disappearing entirely. The original will likely behave much the same. Having said that: I can't recreate the 2nd patch on the Behringer or the CA2600. Getting way more sawtoothy beating between the oscillators than in the video. Which seems to be what that patch is all about.

The first video patch IS within the possibilities of the CA2600. FWIW, here's an example preset ( similar, but no attempt at an exact match ; I think it speaks Dutch )

Vocalish Filter FM.zip

When it comes to matching patches, there's a few notable and significant distinctions between CA2600 and hardware, btw. Apart from the pulsewidth range there's also a difference in phase relationship between the waves of a single oscillator, which makes them combine quite differently. And also the pulse/square and sawtooth on the hardware are DC (0-10V), while sine and triangle are AC (-5V - +5V. ) This will require different modulation amount settings on CA2600, which uses all AC waveforms. Ring modulator is different too, no DC setting on the CA.

[Tj Shredder]

Interesting observations. Did you send them to Cherry? In the past there was a discussion about differences in the self oscillation area of the filter which led to enhancements of the filter in an update… Now its even better to control than in the hardware. There are differences which are welcome…

[ELEX]

Interesting observations. Did you send them to Cherry? ...

Nah...these differences all seem conscious design decisions on the part of CA. Much like omitting Total Ext. in PS-20. All hard to miss stuff, most of it even described in the original manuals. Guess the extra VCA in the voltage processors is there to replace the ringmod DC mode. Anyway, changing things like these will ( severely ) affect existing CA2600 patches, so that's never gonna happen. It's no much of a problem as long as one's not trying to match patches to the original. Which I don't normally do, lucky me !

[OscSync]

On the subject of that second patch: what it's doing with pulsewidth is simply not possible with CA2600, which doesn't allow for as narrow a pulse as that patch seems to use. Minimum PW on CA2600 is about 10% when 'initial pulsewidth' set to maximum. It won't get narrower that that. The settings in your patch actually increase PW ! ( seems the modulator is folded rather than clipped ) In the video PW is on or near minimum and modulation is subtracted from that, which on my Behringer 2600 hardware clone is possible and yields an even narrower pulse, to the point of disappearing entirely. The original will likely behave much the same. Having said that: I can't recreate the 2nd patch on the Behringer or the CA2600. Getting way more sawtoothy beating between the oscillators than in the video. Which seems to be what that patch is all about.

Ah, that's reassuring to hear. Ensures my sanity to know I wasn't overlooking something simple.

The first video patch IS within the possibilities of the CA2600. FWIW, here's an example preset ( similar, but no attempt at an exact match ; I think it speaks Dutch ) Vocalish Filter FM.zip

This is amazing Thanks so much for taking the time.
Dutch is fine by me

When it comes to matching patches, there's a few notable and significant distinctions between CA2600 and hardware, btw. Apart from the pulsewidth range there's also a difference in phase relationship between the waves of a single oscillator, which makes them combine quite differently. And also the pulse/square and sawtooth on the hardware are DC (0-10V), while sine and triangle are AC (-5V - +5V. ) This will require different modulation amount settings on CA2600, which uses all AC waveforms. Ring modulator is different too, no DC setting on the CA.

Thanks for this info. I was under the impression Cherry like to recreate 1:1 emulations regardless of whether doing so is logical in a modern DAW environment. This obviously has pros and cons, however it seems I was wrong in this assumption and they do indeed make their own changes as you describe.

Thanks again for that. Super happy with the result, definitely something I can use.

[ELEX]

You're welcome !

All in all CA2600 is still pretty nice esp. with oversampling. It's more user friendly than the TimewARP 2600* and when it comes to audio frequency modulations it beats both TimewARP and Arturia's 2600 V hands down.

* though that is the only one to have a proper bi-directional electronic switch ; forgot about that patch matching impossibility yesterday.

[yul]

Can't get anywhere near that on Monark or Model 72.

You can't or no one can ?

I could definitely do it with Model 72 and same with CA2600 although it's different than Moog (the previous video shows this difference. Just keep resonance tame and you can get there.

[HOTF]

So... I just impulsively bought this thing for 10$. I was like whatever these days it's the price of a coke and a bag of chips. I read this thread before having the chance to demo it and was prepared to be disapointed. To my surprise it sounded great imo. I had a few minutes for lunch and demoed the presets and was pleasently surprised how good they sounded + they were suprisingly very usable (espacially the bass presets). I generally don't use a lot of presets in my productions but might have to use a few from this thing.