May be famous phase accomulator wavetables from Ensoniq / Korg / Roland also, they have lot of 80s character in sound.stillshaded wrote:model Waldorf waves scanning oscilators.
multiply sound possibilities by x100
New DIVA components
-
david.beholder david.beholder https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=159839
- KVRAF
- 1914 posts since 13 Sep, 2007
Murderous duck!
-
News From The Sky News From The Sky https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=241844
- KVRist
- 186 posts since 20 Oct, 2010
No, I gotcha. Good point about time vs value quantization.Sendy wrote:Indeed the quantize function is good for stepped modulation, but it has it's own drawbacks. Modulation passed through it is quantized in value as opposed to time, which is a weird distinction to think about and explain. Instead of a constant rhythmic change, the changes will occur depending how quickly the inputted modulation is changing. Like I said, hard to explain
Yeah, I can see how that could be useful for some things. There's the Rand Hold LFO shape, but no way to apply S&H to other (non-random) LFO shapes or envelopes.Sendy wrote:But basically a sample and hold "circuit" is much more fluid.
Kind of funny to be talking about reducing the rate of parameter updates when early synths with software LFOs and EGs were trying to deliver smooth, rapid-update modulation.
- KVRAF
- 5223 posts since 20 Jul, 2010
I only bring it up selfishly because I realized that there's a certain quality to modulation that falls inbetween fluid and stepped that I really like, which I've picked up from listening to chip music. For example a kick drum will sound like a typical downward swept oscillator with a blast of noise on the attack, but if you look at it in a spectrograph the pitch isn't sweeping but takes on about 8 to 12 discrete pitch values held in a table. It sounds both stepped and fluid at the same time, and lends the sound a sort of computery-ness which is hard to pin down if you aren't aware of that little detail.News From The Sky wrote:No, I gotcha. Good point about time vs value quantization.Sendy wrote:Indeed the quantize function is good for stepped modulation, but it has it's own drawbacks. Modulation passed through it is quantized in value as opposed to time, which is a weird distinction to think about and explain. Instead of a constant rhythmic change, the changes will occur depending how quickly the inputted modulation is changing. Like I said, hard to explain
Yeah, I can see how that could be useful for some things. There's the Rand Hold LFO shape, but no way to apply S&H to other (non-random) LFO shapes or envelopes.Sendy wrote:But basically a sample and hold "circuit" is much more fluid.
Kind of funny to be talking about reducing the rate of parameter updates when early synths with software LFOs and EGs were trying to deliver smooth, rapid-update modulation.
I have to admit I was slightly disappointed when I engaged Diva's "stepped envelope" mode and couldn't hear a damn thing
Anyway, moving away from chiptune fetishism and back to analog fetishism, a good S+H module is certainly part and parcel of some classic analog modulations, and judging from Bazille I think it's safe to say the u-he gang know how to do it right, so fingers crossed.
http://sendy.bandcamp.com/releases < My new album at Bandcamp! Now pay what you like!
-
- KVRian
- 527 posts since 22 Jun, 2004
Probably , someone else already suggested it somewhere in this thread, but the one I would be most excited about would be a wasp filter. I loved daHornet, now having a version of that which is on the quality standard of Diva, would be great.
A second thing which I would love to have in Diva would be an option to share one filter between different voices, like some of the cheaper poly synths did. think Korg DW who had essentially a polyohonic osc section but a monophonic filter section. I would love to hear the kinds of distortion products this would generate with things like the ms20 filters. I think this would expand the scope of Diva quite a bit.
A second thing which I would love to have in Diva would be an option to share one filter between different voices, like some of the cheaper poly synths did. think Korg DW who had essentially a polyohonic osc section but a monophonic filter section. I would love to hear the kinds of distortion products this would generate with things like the ms20 filters. I think this would expand the scope of Diva quite a bit.
Qw, music from twelve weeks in quarantine is now streaming on spotify and bandcamp. This is a collaboration with the the smallest of worlds VR art project, that documents our living spaces in times of isolation. You can join their project here.
-
aaron aardvark aaron aardvark https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=248508
- KVRAF
- 3061 posts since 22 Jan, 2011 from near Los Angeles
I wonder how much Urs was influenced by this poll? Regardless, I'm very glad for the Uhbie filter.
You can hear my original music at this link: https://www.soundclick.com/artist/defau ... dID=224436
- KVRAF
- 14455 posts since 16 Feb, 2005 from Planet Earth, Somewhere
like which hardware synth? Cause as I am sure you know Diva was meant to emulate the old hardware stuff...Nokenoku wrote:Imo the one thing DIVA needs the most, are some better envelopes.
rsp
- KVRAF
- 14455 posts since 16 Feb, 2005 from Planet Earth, Somewhere
for some it is......you are trying to make it what it isn't
although I am not even sure why I even care.
good luck with your quest.
rsp
although I am not even sure why I even care.
good luck with your quest.
rsp
sound sculptist
-
- KVRist
- 276 posts since 12 Nov, 2011
I wonder what's the practicality of adding one module that models the wavetable sections of the PPG Wave, Prophet VS and Microwave XT at the same time?
One thing I would say is that it would put Diva into direct competition with Waldorf and Wolfgang Palm. Whereas most of the other technologies appearing in Diva aren't being exploited in VST form by the original people behind them.
One thing I would say is that it would put Diva into direct competition with Waldorf and Wolfgang Palm. Whereas most of the other technologies appearing in Diva aren't being exploited in VST form by the original people behind them.
-
- KVRAF
- 1724 posts since 10 Feb, 2008 from Berlin, Germany
It's a digital OSC with that famous supersaw. Not less, not more.zvenx wrote:for some it is......you are trying to make it what it isn't
I am not trying to make anything out of it.
All I'm saying is, that in my opinion DIVA would profite the most from some better envelopes, and that I don't care, where they're coming from.
- KVRAF
- 6097 posts since 5 Jul, 2001 from Just about .... there
My guess is most people would want something not normally considered analogish, like multipoint or looping generators. (MSEGish)pdxindy wrote:What sort of improvement would you like to see?Nokenoku wrote:Imo the one thing DIVA needs the most, are some better envelopes.
But, I do have a looping ADSR that uses an internal LFO. It has two modes, Constant or loop while gate is high.
http://www.steamsynth.com/m_VCADSR.aspx
EDIT: I should add that the above unit has a digital core. But, there are plenty of analog versions like
http://www.oakleysound.com/adsr.htm
I have the PCB and most of the parts, but no panel to build this guy.
There are also, multi-segment analog EGs but, they are kind of weird. Something like
http://www.encoreelectronics.com/cont_ueg3.html
I wouldn't mind seeing something like a cascading EG. Heck, you might even be able to do something along these lines already. I haven't really tried.
If you have to ask, you can't afford the answer
